My daughter and granddaughter both got whooping cough even though both were immunized......do you think that they would have been less infectious to others just because they had had their shots?
That is incredibly unfortunate. Knowing two people of different ages that, I am guessing, were immunized at different times from different sources both getting a rare disease is very bad luck. Outside of my mother having it in the 1940's, I have never met anyone with whooping cough or that has had it. I am glad to hear that your family came through it all right.
I do not think that an immunization that did not take would make a person more infectious. That would depend on the strain of the disease and the growth among other factors. We are talking about communicable diseases here.
Both my mother and my husband had extremely bad reactions to the flu shots.....my mother almost died. She was told never to have one again. Do you know how many strains of flu there are? You cannot possibly be immunized for all of them.
Again, I have not met anyone that has had a bad reaction to flu shots, though in the case of flu shots, I have heard stories second hand.
No one is claiming that attempts are being made to immunize against all the possible strains. Why do you bring that up?
I never said they didn't.
You certainly implied it.
All I said was that we need more investigation into the safety of multiple vaccinations given to very young children and what is in them.
They are tested. I wonder if you really would accept more testing if the results indicate that they were as safe as they could be made to be or would you just keep demanding more testing. If there are ways to improve on vaccine safety, no one is going to suggest that they not be examined. But it is not like these issues are being ignored either.
Would you rather ignore the evidence that vaccines have caused harm to so many children?
I am aware that vaccines have risks. I believe I have mentioned that a few times. Are you implying that I am some kind of monster that hates children, because I want to protect them from easily dealt with childhood disease? I think that anything that improves the safety of a product should be examined for application where possible.
If there was no harm, then why have a Vaccine Injury Compensation Scheme?
Again, I have not said there is no harm. Are you sure you are responding to the correct poster?
Why pay out over 4 billion dollars if these children were not damaged?
Once again, I do not deny that there are risks to this. There are risks to everything. There is a risk of doing nothing. In the case of these communicable diseases, doing nothing could be the potential for outbreaks and even pandemics. Lots of children could die or be disabled.
Can any amount of money compensate a person for losing their life or their physical and mental abilities?
I am not sure how you compensate someone that has lost their life.
What would you suggest then? Stop producing and using vaccines to quell the fears of people that demand unreasonable conditions to every act of life and just tell the parents of children dead from disease to suck it up?
Apart from the figures I provided, you are misinterpreting what I said. I am not against vaccinations per se....I am against giving tiny babies more viruses than their immune systems can handle all at once. I am asking that the ingredients (both biological and those used as preservatives) used in these vaccinations be thoroughly tested. Is that too much to ask?
What is your evidence behind your demands? Why do you think none of these things are tested?
You see, if we were giving them single dose vaccinations, we could easily see which ones if any were causing a problem. And if we gave them single dose vaccinations and the rates of autism went down, we would have a case against the MMR vaccine.
There is no study to date linking autism with vaccination.
How many people do you know that ever got measles, mumps and rubella all at once?
None, since those diseases were taken care of by vaccines until people starting believing the sky was falling and stopped letting their children be vaccinated. I would say the odds of my meeting someone that has had one of those illnesses has gone up a lot.
I am for safety, not in trusting big, money-hungry corporations with the health and safety of my children just so that they can make a fortune at the expense of the few who are disabled for life or even killed by a parent's attempt to safeguard them when these big corporations couldn't care less. Just pay the victims to shut them up.
I suppose you consider that I am not for safety, because I support the use of vaccines. That would be untrue. I am also realistic and recognize that things in life have risks.
I must admit that in my reading, I have discovered that the market has changed since the mid-1980's and vaccines are becoming more and more profitable. They are still only a small fraction of annual drug sales, but still very profitable. This, by itself is not evidence of any wrongdoing or means the quality of vaccines is bad.
My trust is not in companies, but in the research. Right now, I do not see any research that would tell me vaccines are more risky that illness that they prevent. I do not see any research that supports that they cause autism. What am I supposed to do? Should I ignore the research that you are demanding and just arbitrarily rise up against them?
It is easy to randomly lay blame on big companies. They are a great scapegoat for this sort of conspiracy allusion that does not require evidence, but cranks up the emotions of people to jump on the bandwagon. Everybody wants easy answers. There are areas of the pharmaceutical industry that could use fixing. There are areas of the healthcare system that could use fixing. Neither of those two points is evidence that vaccines are so dangerous that we should just risk disease instead.
Is that good enough?
This is Dr Theresa Deisher, an expert on vaccination safety.
We need more research......honest research.
I am all for research. But if the research keeps saying no connection between vaccines and autism are you going to finally accept those conclusions or just keep demanding more research?