Not vaxing.. a serious question

Que*Syrah · October 2010

With anything you have to weigh the pros and cons and do whichever outweighs the other.

baby_tar_heel · October 2010

sugrfrejaz:
baby_tar_heel:
sugrfrejaz:

Really? You'd rather your baby die of polio than become Autistic?

$10 says you are pro-life too.

Your statement indicates that we really have a choice in the matter. If someone was standing here saying "your child can either have polio or be autistic" , then that would be a different situation. However we don't have that choice. We could vaccinate and they could have a deadly reaction. I'm not willing to take that chance - and part of making such a serious decision as not vaccinating is being comfortable with the potential consequences, which could include infection. However we are under the guidance of a pediatrician and he has suggested we wait. Our son has had medical complications but we would hav emade this decision even without the complications. We can't live with ourselves if something were to happen.

I think perspective changes when you work with families of children with autism who truely believe that something happened to their child. I can't argue with them - they are mothers just as I am and I respect that if they think the vaccinations caused their child to regress, then that's what happened.

You are still evading my question.

Autism is not a deadly reaction.

Your baby is much more likely to contract a fatal issue if you do not vaccinate. You are choosing that fate if you do not vax.

This statement makes no sense:

Our son has had medical complications but we would hav emade this decision even without the complications.

And finally:

they are mothers just as I am and I respect that if they think the vaccinations caused their child to regress, then that's what happened.

So if these mothers told you the boogie man came in and gave their baby measles, would you believe that too? Cause really, the chances of both of those things happening is pretty much equal.

Sorry I don't bump during Grey's Anatomy, so I'm back. Anyway, not sure how the medical statement doesn't make sense. My son caught an infection at a week old (MRSA) and has battled it on and off since. The dr. has advised us to wait until he has been MRSA free for several months, and that hasn't happened yet. However, even if he hadn't developed MRSA, we had already made the decision to delay vaccinations completely until 2 years and go slowly from that point on.

And regarding the statement about the mothers of children with autism, I just try and put myself in their position. If your child took a dose of tylenol and then hours later or the next day started exhibiting neurological deficits, and the tylenol was the only thing that you had done "different" in their day - you might question whether or not your child might have had an adverse reaction to the tylenol. Same thing with vaccines. I respect these mother's opinions and dont want to put myself in their position.

Some might say it's risky, but honestly the way my dr. (and my husband and I) look at it is: it's unlikely we would come in contact w/ these diseases. If we did, it would be even more unlikely that the reaction would be severe. Just because you contract these diseases doesn't mean immediate death. It's a risk, yes, but an educated one.

IrishBrideND · October 2010

I love TTT

sdtchica13 · October 2010

simplyatomic:
ABauer55:
I'm sure that you don't need our approval to do what is medically necessary for your children. I'm also sure you understand the difference between your situation and the earlier post. No one (of sound mine) would ever tell a parent who is facing epilepsy that they're being irresponsible in halting vaccines.

I wish you the best of luck with the LO's!!

Nope the bump doesnt make my parenting choices lol. I was just wondering if anyone was BSC enough to think people in my situation were dumb for not doing them so that I can stay clear of that one. lol

Definitely not! You have a legit medical reason for not vaxing. If vaxing is going to put your little one's life in danger, then of course you should wait and get medical clearance before doing so. Its the idiots who have no legit reason not to vax that pisss me off, lol.

baby_tar_heel · October 2010

sugrfrejaz:
baby_tar_heel:

I think there are two ways to look at proof -

1) People who vaccinate until there is proof they are not safe.

2) People who don't vaccinate until there is proof they are safe.

I'm in the second situation because once you inject your child, you can't take it back. So since there is doubt, I won't vaccinate until there is proof.

Just because a study isn't published yet doesn't mean it's not reputible. It means it's not concluded or that there are other factors.

I'm glad you're able to do what makes your family comfortable, and we will do what makes my family comfortable.

I'm still just trying to get a straight answer out of you. You are running a BIG risk of your baby get a FATAL disease to remove the extremely small and as yet unhypothesized (nevermind proven) risk of your baby getting a behavioral disability?

I would 10% understand this position if you could offer me one (just one) hypothesis as to how you think that actually biologically occurs with vaccines and the human brain. The fact is that despite what people want to believe or think, there still isn't any actual suggestion that they can come up with as to how these are related. I agree that the FDA sucks and we call put 2+2 together on a lot of medical issues way before science confirms it - but we typically have at least a basic biological understanding to go along with our theory.

I would recommend if you're interested in the topic that you read Evidence of Harm by David Kirby. It explains things very clearly although it's heavy on the reasearch side. It was very helpful for our family.

These diseases are sometimes but not always fatal.

baby_tar_heel · October 2010

bootsie08:

I am in the special education field. I've worked with autistic children in NC, KY, KS and now CA. Very, very few of the parents I've worked with believe that their child's autism was caused by vaccines. When I taught in KY, I had the honor of working with a high school student with autism. His father was a well respected neurologist and his mother an anesthesiologist turned ASD clinical researcher. They were pro-vaccines and had fully vetted any plausible link. Another mother of a student in that same class did believe there was a link. Her source: the Oprah.com message board. My experience was that the parents who believed there was a vaccine link were very closed off to any other explanation. They declined invitations to attend conferences that explored genetic, neurological or metabolic influences.

I'm also really curious to know what conferences you're going to, Tar Heel, that preach the evils of vaccines.

The most recent conference I went to was called Autism, ADHD, Aspergers, PDD and Behavior Disorders; Treatments and Therapies that Make a Difference. It was mainly about biomedical treatments, nutritional supplements, immunizations, etc. From there our family made significant lifestyle changes. The presenters were physicians and physician assistants.

talltalltrees · October 2010

baby_tar_heel:

I would recommend if you're interested in the topic that you read Evidence of Harm by David Kirby. It explains things very clearly although it's heavy on the reasearch side. It was very helpful for our family.

David Kirby is a journalist best known for his articles on gay tourism in Mexico and people watching pornography on their car DVD players. This is who you take medical advice from??

baby_tar_heel · October 2010

talltalltrees:

baby_tar_heel:
In addition, there recently was a supreme court case that awarded the parents of an autistic child money because they found that vaccines did, in fact, trigger this particular child's autism.

This is totally factually inaccurate. First of all, the Supreme Court doesn't award money. They decide matters of constitutionality.

Second of all, the Supreme Court hasn't even RULED on that case yet. The only thing that's happened so far is that they've decided to hear it and have begun to hear arguments.

Third, the case that is currently before the SCOTUS is that the plantiffs (i.e. the family of the child who was allegedly harmed by the vaccine) were denied their right to a fair trial because their case was heard in a special vaccine court rather than in a regular court. The ONLY thing the SC will decide is whether their case should be heard in a regular civil court. They will make no rulings whatsoever on the science of the case because that is clearly beyond their jurisdiction. The Supreme Court Justices are legal professionals, not doctors.

FINALLY, the "vaccine court", which is a special court set up to hear claims of those who say they have been harmed by vaccines, does not decide ANYTHING related to medical issues. The burden of proof in that court is far, far lower than it is in other courts. All you have to do is essentially prove that you got a vaccine and then you suffered an injury. You don't have to prove that the vaccine caused the injury hardly at all.

You should really do your research before you go around spouting nonsense.

I'm impressed a bumpie knows about all this - I figured I wouldn't have to get into the details. Way to go, an educated one!

Elizabeth81 · October 2010

baby_tar_heel:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/government-concedes-vacci_b_88323.html one of many articles that will validate my statement that the supreme court did award the family compensation, indicating an association between autism, mito. disorder and vaccinations.

Um... you do realize that the Court of Federal Claims and the US Supreme Court are two completely different courts, right? (nevermind that you clearly have a misunderstanding of what actually happened in that case - like the fact that it settled instead of being litigated).

baby_tar_heel · October 2010

laurakaz13:
baby_tar_heel:
sugrfrejaz:
baby_tar_heel:
HotSauceonaStick:
baby_tar_heel:

Actually Wake Forest University is doing an additional study to re-examine the study that was "debunked" by the british scientist. They are examining 275 children with regressive autism and bowel disease (which an extremely high percentage of children with autism have bowel problems). So far, 82 have been tested. 70 of those 82 are positive for the measles virus...not the type you would get exposed to in real life and develop antibodies to, but specifically the type in vaccines.

Their work so far is not indicating that autism is caused by vaccines; however they are stating that it indicates that the measles virus in the gut could be (key word = could) coming from the MMR vaccine. The interesting link to austism is the severe bowel problems these children have.

In addition, there recently was a supreme court case that awarded the parents of an autistic child money because they found that vaccines did, in fact, trigger this particular child's autism. The key is that some children have an underlying mitochondrial disorder. Many times these disorders are undiagnosed at birth. The immature immune system of these children can't handle the vaccines and the result is autism. I am a therapist and I work with several families whose children have a mitochondrial disorder that was diagnosed after they developed autism.

The key is that some of us do not trust the FDA, because it is true that pharmaceutical companies are way too involved with the FDA. How can I trust a company that says "here, get a chicken pox vaccine - chicken pox are deadly" when chicken pox are very very rarely serious. In fact, in my state, there were more deaths related to adverse reactions to the vaccine in the last 10 years than deaths related to chicken pox themselves. Same thing with rotovirus - they make it out to be deadly but really it's just a bad stomach bug.

My main reason for not vaccinating our son is religious. However, I also would not vaccinate (apart from our religion) because I do not know for certain that my son doesn't have an underlying mitochondrial disorder. Therefore, I won't vaccinate as it has been proven by the US courts that there is a link there.

Please don't assume that those of us who don't vaccinate are basing our info on Jenny Mcarthy or whatever her name is that has become so famous after she got on Oprah. Our pediatrian actually recommends that no one vaccinate until 9 months and even then only with dTAP - waiting until several years old for anything else. There ARE legitimate doctors out there who know there is sketchy business between the FDA and pharmaceutical companies.

And more thing. You might be more afraid of measles / mumps - and that's your choice to vaccinate to protect your child. Some of us are more afraid of the unknown reaction to a vaccine that could cause harm - and that's our right. If you trust the vaccines so much, why are you so afraid if we don't vaccinate? You must have some doubts about how great they are if you have that fear.

Okay off my soap box.

** edited for spelling
baby_tar_heel:

Actually Wake Forest University is doing an additional study to re-examine the study that was "debunked" by the british scientist. They are examining 275 children with regressive autism and bowel disease (which an extremely high percentage of children with autism have bowel problems). So far, 82 have been tested. 70 of those 82 are positive for the measles virus...not the type you would get exposed to in real life and develop antibodies to, but specifically the type in vaccines.

Their work so far is not indicating that autism is caused by vaccines; however they are stating that it indicates that the measles virus in the gut could be (key word = could) coming from the MMR vaccine. The interesting link to austism is the severe bowel problems these children have.

In addition, there recently was a supreme court case that awarded the parents of an autistic child money because they found that vaccines did, in fact, trigger this particular child's autism. The key is that some children have an underlying mitochondrial disorder. Many times these disorders are undiagnosed at birth. The immature immune system of these children can't handle the vaccines and the result is autism. I am a therapist and I work with several families whose children have a mitochondrial disorder that was diagnosed after they developed autism.

The key is that some of us do not trust the FDA, because it is true that pharmaceutical companies are way too involved with the FDA. How can I trust a company that says "here, get a chicken pox vaccine - chicken pox are deadly" when chicken pox are very very rarely serious. In fact, in my state, there were more deaths related to adverse reactions to the vaccine in the last 10 years than deaths related to chicken pox themselves. Same thing with rotovirus - they make it out to be deadly but really it's just a bad stomach bug.

My main reason for not vaccinating our son is religious. However, I also would not vaccinate (apart from our religion) because I do not know for certain that my son doesn't have an underlying mitochondrial disorder. Therefore, I won't vaccinate as it has been proven by the US courts that there is a link there.

Please don't assume that those of us who don't vaccinate are basing our info on Jenny Mcarthy or whatever her name is that has become so famous after she got on Oprah. Our pediatrian actually recommends that no one vaccinate until 9 months and even then only with dTAP - waiting until several years old for anything else. There ARE legitimate doctors out there who know there is sketchy business between the FDA and pharmaceutical companies.

And more thing. You might be more afraid of measles / mumps - and that's your choice to vaccinate to protect your child. Some of us are more afraid of the unknown reaction to a vaccine that could cause harm - and that's our right. If you trust the vaccines so much, why are you so afraid if we don't vaccinate? You must have some doubts about how great they are if you have that fear.

Okay off my soap box.

** edited for spelling

I would rather have an autistic child than a dead one because s/he contracted measles or polio or something else that is almost 100% preventable.

And thank goodness we live in a country where you are able to make that choice, and we are able to make the opposite choice. I'm willing to take my chances.

Really? You'd rather your baby die of polio than become Autistic?

$10 says you are pro-life too.

Your statement indicates that we really have a choice in the matter. If someone was standing here saying "your child can either have polio or be autistic" , then that would be a different situation. However we don't have that choice. We could vaccinate and they could have a deadly reaction. I'm not willing to take that chance - and part of making such a serious decision as not vaccinating is being comfortable with the potential consequences, which could include infection. However we are under the guidance of a pediatrician and he has suggested we wait. Our son has had medical complications but we would hav emade this decision even without the complications. We can't live with ourselves if something were to happen.

I think perspective changes when you work with families of children with autism who truely believe that something happened to their child. I can't argue with them - they are mothers just as I am and I respect that if they think the vaccinations caused their child to regress, then that's what happened.

So, when your child dies a horrible death from polio or pertussis, how will you feel then? And I'm sure mothers with autistic kids are great resources for medical advice.

It's a question my husband and I discussed quite a bit and we are more comfortable with delaying vaccinations.

talltalltrees · October 2010

baby_tar_heel:
Our son has had medical complications but we would hav emade this decision even without the complications. We can't live with ourselves if something were to happen.

Some might say it's risky, but honestly the way my dr. (and my husband and I) look at it is: it's unlikely we would come in contact w/ these diseases. If we did, it would be even more unlikely that the reaction would be severe. Just because you contract these diseases doesn't mean immediate death. It's a risk, yes, but an educated one.

So you couldn't live with yourself if your child had complications from a vaccine, but it wouldn't be a big deal if your child had permanent brain damage, paralysis or died from a disease you failed to vaccinate him against. Interesting.

IrishBrideND · October 2010

baby_tar_heel:
talltalltrees:

baby_tar_heel:
In addition, there recently was a supreme court case that awarded the parents of an autistic child money because they found that vaccines did, in fact, trigger this particular child's autism.

This is totally factually inaccurate. First of all, the Supreme Court doesn't award money. They decide matters of constitutionality.

Second of all, the Supreme Court hasn't even RULED on that case yet. The only thing that's happened so far is that they've decided to hear it and have begun to hear arguments.

Third, the case that is currently before the SCOTUS is that the plantiffs (i.e. the family of the child who was allegedly harmed by the vaccine) were denied their right to a fair trial because their case was heard in a special vaccine court rather than in a regular court. The ONLY thing the SC will decide is whether their case should be heard in a regular civil court. They will make no rulings whatsoever on the science of the case because that is clearly beyond their jurisdiction. The Supreme Court Justices are legal professionals, not doctors.

FINALLY, the "vaccine court", which is a special court set up to hear claims of those who say they have been harmed by vaccines, does not decide ANYTHING related to medical issues. The burden of proof in that court is far, far lower than it is in other courts. All you have to do is essentially prove that you got a vaccine and then you suffered an injury. You don't have to prove that the vaccine caused the injury hardly at all.

You should really do your research before you go around spouting nonsense.

I'm impressed a bumpie knows about all this - I figured I wouldn't have to get into the details. Way to go, an educated one!

wow. So you are condescending and think you are smarter than everyone on top of the other crap you spew. NICE

eta to remove insult

baby_tar_heel · October 2010

talltalltrees:

baby_tar_heel:

I would recommend if you're interested in the topic that you read Evidence of Harm by David Kirby. It explains things very clearly although it's heavy on the reasearch side. It was very helpful for our family.

David Kirby is a journalist best known for his articles on gay tourism in Mexico and people watching pornography on their car DVD players. This is who you take medical advice from??

We take our medical advice from our physician, who supports delayed vaccination. We read interesting journal books from authors such as David Kirby. There is a difference.

baby_tar_heel · October 2010

Elizabeth81:
baby_tar_heel:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/government-concedes-vacci_b_88323.html one of many articles that will validate my statement that the supreme court did award the family compensation, indicating an association between autism, mito. disorder and vaccinations.

Um... you do realize that the Court of Federal Claims and the US Supreme Court are two completely different courts, right? (nevermind that you clearly have a misunderstanding of what actually happened in that case - like the fact that it settled instead of being litigated).

I do have an understanding of what happened in the case just figured I could get by on the bump without really explaining it well - most the time the people on here aren't too well read...no offense. Glad to see there are bumpies that are up to date on whats going on before they inject their child with the crap in vaccines.

IrishBrideND · October 2010

baby_tar_heel:
Elizabeth81:
baby_tar_heel:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/government-concedes-vacci_b_88323.html one of many articles that will validate my statement that the supreme court did award the family compensation, indicating an association between autism, mito. disorder and vaccinations.

Um... you do realize that the Court of Federal Claims and the US Supreme Court are two completely different courts, right? (nevermind that you clearly have a misunderstanding of what actually happened in that case - like the fact that it settled instead of being litigated).

I do have an understanding of what happened in the case just figured I could get by on the bump without really explaining it well - most the time the people on here aren't too well read...no offense. Glad to see there are bumpies that are up to date on whats going on before they inject their child with the crap in vaccines.

how on earth is that not an insult? many of us (shocking, I know) do our research. You aren't a special snowflake who is the only one who has researched anything.

but your statement here explains so much.

baby_tar_heel · October 2010

talltalltrees:

baby_tar_heel:
Our son has had medical complications but we would hav emade this decision even without the complications. We can't live with ourselves if something were to happen.

Some might say it's risky, but honestly the way my dr. (and my husband and I) look at it is: it's unlikely we would come in contact w/ these diseases. If we did, it would be even more unlikely that the reaction would be severe. Just because you contract these diseases doesn't mean immediate death. It's a risk, yes, but an educated one.

So you couldn't live with yourself if your child had complications from a vaccine, but it wouldn't be a big deal if your child had permanent brain damage, paralysis or died from a disease you failed to vaccinate him against. Interesting.

That would be the religious part of our decision, I guess you missed that part which I posted a while back. Injecting our child with something that could potentially harm them would go against our religion - if something were to happen then we would feel like we had done harm to another human being which is un-Christian.

If he were to contact something due to not being vaccinated then it would be out of our hands. There's a difference - something purposefully done (injection) vs. something random (contraction).

talltalltrees · October 2010

baby_tar_heel:
Elizabeth81:
baby_tar_heel:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/government-concedes-vacci_b_88323.html one of many articles that will validate my statement that the supreme court did award the family compensation, indicating an association between autism, mito. disorder and vaccinations.

Um... you do realize that the Court of Federal Claims and the US Supreme Court are two completely different courts, right? (nevermind that you clearly have a misunderstanding of what actually happened in that case - like the fact that it settled instead of being litigated).

I do have an understanding of what happened in the case just figured I could get by on the bump without really explaining it well - most the time the people on here aren't too well read...no offense. Glad to see there are bumpies that are up to date on whats going on before they inject their child with the crap in vaccines.

Please, tell me exactly what the ingredients in vaccines are that you consider "crap."

I consider dying of HiB "crap" especially since I had a family member die at 4 weeks of HiB before the vaccine was available. I'm pretty sure her father would have preferred to inject "crap" into her than have to watch his baby daughter seize repeatedly and then die in his arms.

baby_tar_heel · October 2010

IrishBrideND:
baby_tar_heel:
Elizabeth81:
baby_tar_heel:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/government-concedes-vacci_b_88323.html one of many articles that will validate my statement that the supreme court did award the family compensation, indicating an association between autism, mito. disorder and vaccinations.

Um... you do realize that the Court of Federal Claims and the US Supreme Court are two completely different courts, right? (nevermind that you clearly have a misunderstanding of what actually happened in that case - like the fact that it settled instead of being litigated).

I do have an understanding of what happened in the case just figured I could get by on the bump without really explaining it well - most the time the people on here aren't too well read...no offense. Glad to see there are bumpies that are up to date on whats going on before they inject their child with the crap in vaccines.

how on earth is that not an insult? many of us (shocking, I know) do our research. You aren't a special snowflake who is the only one who has researched anything.

but your statement here explains so much.

It probably was insulting, but that's okay. I've seen people be so rude on this website before - if you're in the "in-crowd" here then it's seen as funny but the rest of us who usually lurk have to keep our mouths closed. Anyway, enjoyed the debate! Good luck to you and your LO :-)

talltalltrees · October 2010

baby_tar_heel:
talltalltrees:

baby_tar_heel:
Our son has had medical complications but we would hav emade this decision even without the complications. We can't live with ourselves if something were to happen.

Some might say it's risky, but honestly the way my dr. (and my husband and I) look at it is: it's unlikely we would come in contact w/ these diseases. If we did, it would be even more unlikely that the reaction would be severe. Just because you contract these diseases doesn't mean immediate death. It's a risk, yes, but an educated one.

So you couldn't live with yourself if your child had complications from a vaccine, but it wouldn't be a big deal if your child had permanent brain damage, paralysis or died from a disease you failed to vaccinate him against. Interesting.

That would be the religious part of our decision, I guess you missed that part which I posted a while back. Injecting our child with something that could potentially harm them would go against our religion - if something were to happen then we would feel like we had done harm to another human being which is un-Christian.

If he were to contact something due to not being vaccinated then it would be out of our hands. There's a difference - something purposefully done (injection) vs. something random (contraction).

So God also doesn't want you to drive your children in a car, am I correct?

How do you reconcile your beliefs with the fact that your not vaccinating is putting the OP's child (and many others) at risk? Is that not doing harm to others?

baby_tar_heel · October 2010

talltalltrees:
baby_tar_heel:
Elizabeth81:
baby_tar_heel:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/government-concedes-vacci_b_88323.html one of many articles that will validate my statement that the supreme court did award the family compensation, indicating an association between autism, mito. disorder and vaccinations.

Um... you do realize that the Court of Federal Claims and the US Supreme Court are two completely different courts, right? (nevermind that you clearly have a misunderstanding of what actually happened in that case - like the fact that it settled instead of being litigated).

I do have an understanding of what happened in the case just figured I could get by on the bump without really explaining it well - most the time the people on here aren't too well read...no offense. Glad to see there are bumpies that are up to date on whats going on before they inject their child with the crap in vaccines.

Please, tell me exactly what the ingredients in vaccines are that you consider "crap."

I consider dying of HiB "crap" especially since I had a family member die at 4 weeks of HiB before the vaccine was available. I'm pretty sure her father would have preferred to inject "crap" into her than have to watch his baby daughter seize repeatedly and then die in his arms.

Aluminum is my main concern re: ingredients, as well as aborted fetal cells in certain vaccines and cells from various animal parts.

IrishBrideND · October 2010

baby_tar_heel:
IrishBrideND:
baby_tar_heel:
Elizabeth81:
baby_tar_heel:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/government-concedes-vacci_b_88323.html one of many articles that will validate my statement that the supreme court did award the family compensation, indicating an association between autism, mito. disorder and vaccinations.

Um... you do realize that the Court of Federal Claims and the US Supreme Court are two completely different courts, right? (nevermind that you clearly have a misunderstanding of what actually happened in that case - like the fact that it settled instead of being litigated).

I do have an understanding of what happened in the case just figured I could get by on the bump without really explaining it well - most the time the people on here aren't too well read...no offense. Glad to see there are bumpies that are up to date on whats going on before they inject their child with the crap in vaccines.

how on earth is that not an insult? many of us (shocking, I know) do our research. You aren't a special snowflake who is the only one who has researched anything.

but your statement here explains so much.

It probably was insulting, but that's okay. I've seen people be so rude on this website before - if you're in the "in-crowd" here then it's seen as funny but the rest of us who usually lurk have to keep our mouths closed. Anyway, enjoyed the debate! Good luck to you and your LO :-)

lol. I do enjoy that you left as soon as people were challenging what you posted.

I really do wish you and your LO good luck.

ToledoDeux · October 2010

baby_tar_heel:
I do have an understanding of what happened in the case just figured I could get by on the bump without really explaining it well - most the time the people on here aren't too well read...no offense. Glad to see there are bumpies that are up to date on whats going on before they inject their child with the crap in vaccines.

bh2720 · October 2010

baby_tar_heel:
talltalltrees:

baby_tar_heel:
Our son has had medical complications but we would hav emade this decision even without the complications. We can't live with ourselves if something were to happen.

Some might say it's risky, but honestly the way my dr. (and my husband and I) look at it is: it's unlikely we would come in contact w/ these diseases. If we did, it would be even more unlikely that the reaction would be severe. Just because you contract these diseases doesn't mean immediate death. It's a risk, yes, but an educated one.

So you couldn't live with yourself if your child had complications from a vaccine, but it wouldn't be a big deal if your child had permanent brain damage, paralysis or died from a disease you failed to vaccinate him against. Interesting.

That would be the religious part of our decision, I guess you missed that part which I posted a while back. Injecting our child with something that could potentially harm them would go against our religion - if something were to happen then we would feel like we had done harm to another human being which is un-Christian.

If he were to contact something due to not being vaccinated then it would be out of our hands. There's a difference - something purposefully done (injection) vs. something random (contraction).

what the heck is your religion?

are you saying that if your son contracts pertussis and dies, that is was God's will, even though you could have easily prevented it? and that's somehow not harming your child?

baby_tar_heel · October 2010

IrishBrideND:
baby_tar_heel:
IrishBrideND:
baby_tar_heel:
Elizabeth81:
baby_tar_heel:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/government-concedes-vacci_b_88323.html one of many articles that will validate my statement that the supreme court did award the family compensation, indicating an association between autism, mito. disorder and vaccinations.

Um... you do realize that the Court of Federal Claims and the US Supreme Court are two completely different courts, right? (nevermind that you clearly have a misunderstanding of what actually happened in that case - like the fact that it settled instead of being litigated).

I do have an understanding of what happened in the case just figured I could get by on the bump without really explaining it well - most the time the people on here aren't too well read...no offense. Glad to see there are bumpies that are up to date on whats going on before they inject their child with the crap in vaccines.

how on earth is that not an insult? many of us (shocking, I know) do our research. You aren't a special snowflake who is the only one who has researched anything.

but your statement here explains so much.

It probably was insulting, but that's okay. I've seen people be so rude on this website before - if you're in the "in-crowd" here then it's seen as funny but the rest of us who usually lurk have to keep our mouths closed. Anyway, enjoyed the debate! Good luck to you and your LO :-)

lol. I do enjoy that you left as soon as people were challenging what you posted.

I really do wish you and your LO good luck.

I left and came back as soon as Grey's Anatomy was over - we don't have a computer downstairs and our TV is down there - so as enjoyable as the vaccine debates can be, Greys is always better IMO. Anyway thanks and a debate is a debate - it's nothing personal.

talltalltrees · October 2010

baby_tar_heel:
talltalltrees:
baby_tar_heel:
Elizabeth81:
baby_tar_heel:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/government-concedes-vacci_b_88323.html one of many articles that will validate my statement that the supreme court did award the family compensation, indicating an association between autism, mito. disorder and vaccinations.

Um... you do realize that the Court of Federal Claims and the US Supreme Court are two completely different courts, right? (nevermind that you clearly have a misunderstanding of what actually happened in that case - like the fact that it settled instead of being litigated).

I do have an understanding of what happened in the case just figured I could get by on the bump without really explaining it well - most the time the people on here aren't too well read...no offense. Glad to see there are bumpies that are up to date on whats going on before they inject their child with the crap in vaccines.

Please, tell me exactly what the ingredients in vaccines are that you consider "crap."

I consider dying of HiB "crap" especially since I had a family member die at 4 weeks of HiB before the vaccine was available. I'm pretty sure her father would have preferred to inject "crap" into her than have to watch his baby daughter seize repeatedly and then die in his arms.

Aluminum is my main concern re: ingredients, as well as aborted fetal cells in certain vaccines and cells from various animal parts.

There is more aluminum in breastmilk than there is in vaccines and significantly more aluminum in formula than in vaccines.

IrishBrideND · October 2010

baby_tar_heel:
I left and came back as soon as Grey's Anatomy was over - we don't have a computer downstairs and our TV is down there - so as enjoyable as the vaccine debates can be, Greys is always better IMO. Anyway thanks and a debate is a debate - it's nothing personal.

I took your "thanks for the debate" as you were leaving now. Hence my comment.

I'm not sure where I said the debate was personal? I know what a debate is. But thank you for clarifying.

Elizabeth81 · October 2010

baby_tar_heel:
talltalltrees:

baby_tar_heel:
In addition, there recently was a supreme court case that awarded the parents of an autistic child money because they found that vaccines did, in fact, trigger this particular child's autism.
This is totally factually inaccurate. First of all, the Supreme Court doesn't award money. They decide matters of constitutionality.
Second of all, the Supreme Court hasn't even RULED on that case yet. The only thing that's happened so far is that they've decided to hear it and have begun to hear arguments.
Third, the case that is currently before the SCOTUS is that the plantiffs (i.e. the family of the child who was allegedly harmed by the vaccine) were denied their right to a fair trial because their case was heard in a special vaccine court rather than in a regular court. The ONLY thing the SC will decide is whether their case should be heard in a regular civil court. They will make no rulings whatsoever on the science of the case because that is clearly beyond their jurisdiction. The Supreme Court Justices are legal professionals, not doctors.
FINALLY, the "vaccine court", which is a special court set up to hear claims of those who say they have been harmed by vaccines, does not decide ANYTHING related to medical issues. The burden of proof in that court is far, far lower than it is in other courts. All you have to do is essentially prove that you got a vaccine and then you suffered an injury. You don't have to prove that the vaccine caused the injury hardly at all.

You should really do your research before you go around spouting nonsense.
I'm impressed a bumpie knows about all this - I figured I wouldn't have to get into the details. Way to go, an educated one!

You mean you thought you could get by with spouting off blatantly false information to support your position?

baby_tar_heel · October 2010

talltalltrees:
baby_tar_heel:
talltalltrees:
baby_tar_heel:
Elizabeth81:
baby_tar_heel:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/government-concedes-vacci_b_88323.html one of many articles that will validate my statement that the supreme court did award the family compensation, indicating an association between autism, mito. disorder and vaccinations.

Um... you do realize that the Court of Federal Claims and the US Supreme Court are two completely different courts, right? (nevermind that you clearly have a misunderstanding of what actually happened in that case - like the fact that it settled instead of being litigated).

I do have an understanding of what happened in the case just figured I could get by on the bump without really explaining it well - most the time the people on here aren't too well read...no offense. Glad to see there are bumpies that are up to date on whats going on before they inject their child with the crap in vaccines.

Please, tell me exactly what the ingredients in vaccines are that you consider "crap."

I consider dying of HiB "crap" especially since I had a family member die at 4 weeks of HiB before the vaccine was available. I'm pretty sure her father would have preferred to inject "crap" into her than have to watch his baby daughter seize repeatedly and then die in his arms.

Aluminum is my main concern re: ingredients, as well as aborted fetal cells in certain vaccines and cells from various animal parts.

There is more aluminum in breastmilk than there is in vaccines and significantly more aluminum in formula than in vaccines.

The amount of aluminum in breastmilk is dependent on the lifestyle you live; we live a healthy lifestyle.

Ingestion is different than injection.

And with that, I'm off to bed. Good night!

talltalltrees · October 2010

baby_tar_heel:
The amount of aluminum in breastmilk is dependent on the lifestyle you live; we live a healthy lifestyle.

What does that mean? A "healthy" lifestyle in what way?

Ingestion is different than injection.

Please explain to me the differences in how aluminum is metabolized and excreted when ingested versus when injected.

Hot Sauce on a Stick · October 2010

Elizabeth81:
baby_tar_heel:
talltalltrees:

baby_tar_heel:
In addition, there recently was a supreme court case that awarded the parents of an autistic child money because they found that vaccines did, in fact, trigger this particular child's autism.

This is totally factually inaccurate. First of all, the Supreme Court doesn't award money. They decide matters of constitutionality.

Second of all, the Supreme Court hasn't even RULED on that case yet. The only thing that's happened so far is that they've decided to hear it and have begun to hear arguments.

Third, the case that is currently before the SCOTUS is that the plantiffs (i.e. the family of the child who was allegedly harmed by the vaccine) were denied their right to a fair trial because their case was heard in a special vaccine court rather than in a regular court. The ONLY thing the SC will decide is whether their case should be heard in a regular civil court. They will make no rulings whatsoever on the science of the case because that is clearly beyond their jurisdiction. The Supreme Court Justices are legal professionals, not doctors.

FINALLY, the "vaccine court", which is a special court set up to hear claims of those who say they have been harmed by vaccines, does not decide ANYTHING related to medical issues. The burden of proof in that court is far, far lower than it is in other courts. All you have to do is essentially prove that you got a vaccine and then you suffered an injury. You don't have to prove that the vaccine caused the injury hardly at all.

You should really do your research before you go around spouting nonsense.

I'm impressed a bumpie knows about all this - I figured I wouldn't have to get into the details. Way to go, an educated one!

You mean you thought you could get by with spouting off blatantly false information to support your position?

That's how I understood it, too.

Hot Sauce on a Stick · October 2010

talltalltrees:
baby_tar_heel:

The amount of aluminum in breastmilk is dependent on the lifestyle you live; we live a healthy lifestyle.

What does that mean? A "healthy" lifestyle in what way?

Ingestion is different than injection.

Please explain to me the differences in how aluminum is metabolized and excreted when ingested versus when injected.

That means she doesn't put aluminum sprinkles on her ice cream, duh.

Tar Heel, I feel like you're talking out of both sides of your mouth. You said that you can't vaccinate for religious reasons, yet you've done "extensive research" on the topic and talked to your pedi who wants to wait until your DS has been MRSA-free for several months before vaccinating....which is it?

amandopolis · October 2010

HotSauceonaStick:
talltalltrees:
baby_tar_heel:

The amount of aluminum in breastmilk is dependent on the lifestyle you live; we live a healthy lifestyle.
What does that mean? A "healthy" lifestyle in what way?

Ingestion is different than injection.
Please explain to me the differences in how aluminum is metabolized and excreted when ingested versus when injected.
That means she doesn't put aluminum sprinkles on her ice cream, duh.
Tar Heel, I feel like you're talking out of both sides of your mouth. You said that you can't vaccinate for religious reasons, yet you've done "extensive research" on the topic and talked to your pedi who wants to wait until your DS has been MRSA-free for several months before vaccinating....which is it?

It's called "I am doing something irresponsible and stupid, I can't argue with the people who are smarter than me and know I'm being irresponsible and stupid, but rather than admit that I should just vaccinate my kid, I am going to use any possible reasoning that I can think of in the moment to justify my indefensible position."

mrsbecky07 · October 2010

baby_tar_heel:
talltalltrees:

baby_tar_heel:
In addition, there recently was a supreme court case that awarded the parents of an autistic child money because they found that vaccines did, in fact, trigger this particular child's autism.

This is totally factually inaccurate. First of all, the Supreme Court doesn't award money. They decide matters of constitutionality.

Second of all, the Supreme Court hasn't even RULED on that case yet. The only thing that's happened so far is that they've decided to hear it and have begun to hear arguments.

Third, the case that is currently before the SCOTUS is that the plantiffs (i.e. the family of the child who was allegedly harmed by the vaccine) were denied their right to a fair trial because their case was heard in a special vaccine court rather than in a regular court. The ONLY thing the SC will decide is whether their case should be heard in a regular civil court. They will make no rulings whatsoever on the science of the case because that is clearly beyond their jurisdiction. The Supreme Court Justices are legal professionals, not doctors.

FINALLY, the "vaccine court", which is a special court set up to hear claims of those who say they have been harmed by vaccines, does not decide ANYTHING related to medical issues. The burden of proof in that court is far, far lower than it is in other courts. All you have to do is essentially prove that you got a vaccine and then you suffered an injury. You don't have to prove that the vaccine caused the injury hardly at all.

You should really do your research before you go around spouting nonsense.

I'm impressed a bumpie knows about all this - I figured I wouldn't have to get into the details. Way to go, an educated one!

Unlike yourself. You stated in multiple posts that the Supreme Court had heard that particular case and what is worse, you implied the Supreme Court awarded damages. What utter nonsense. It's not a matter of "not getting into the details," it's a matter of being flat-out wrong. nice cover though.

TTT is absolutely correct.

And you are ridiculous in your demand that someone prove a negative. Vaccines don't cause autism. There are reactions to vaccines. some people have worse reactions than others. For people who cannot vaccinate due to side effects, adverse reactions, etc., (like the OP) it is essential that others vaccinate.

If you dont' want to vaccinate - okay, fine. But I don't think your child should be allowed in public schools, in daycares, etc. Your decisions are compromising other children. Why on earth is that acceptable???

Want a personalized experience?

Not vaxing.. a serious question

Re: Not vaxing.. a serious question

Choose Another Board

Search Boards