Evidence Linking Autism Rise in Children to Vaccinations

Which of those words are you having trouble with? I explained that seroconversion is an indication of effectiveness. Are you having trouble with the words "painful", "information", "side-effect", "frequency"? I know they have a lot of letters in them.

 

They why should we have any faith in you?

You were proven wrong, so you say avoid the issue. :laugh::laugh::laugh:

And you have shown nothing to show it unsafe.

Would you rather have maxium? :laugh: Nothing, absolutely nothing is toally safe ... thus you should never take any medication, over the counter nor prescription as all, absolutely all have some side effects.





[quoteI am not putting my faith in anyone. Such is not my practice. I want conclusive proof and all questions answered otherwise it makes no sense to inject this junk into otherwise healthy people.[/QUOTE]

You use the word 'junk' but you have no proof, only your opinion.

 

How does vitamin D protect one against the flu? This is news to me. Vitamin D helps regulate Calcium absorption in the gut for stronger bones.

Have you heard of the "Black Death"? The influenza virus is one of the deadliest infections in human history. The spanish flu of 1918-1920 is estimated to have killed 50 million people. Yes, the human species survived but the devastation to the human race was on the level of world war I.

 

The influenza virus is tricky to fight because it mutates at such a high rate compared to other viruses. In any one flu season, the influenza vaccine cannot cover all the different strains of influenza out there so they take the three most common strains from the previous flu season with the hopes that those three will represent the majority of the cases this year. Of course, some people who get the vaccine will get an influenza strain that was not one of those three.

One year anomalies can have all sorts of explanations. Maybe there was less flu in total that year. Maybe the common strains that year were not particularly virulent. Who knows.

 

Thanks for pointing me to this information. I did a little reading on this. Apparently, vitamin D deficient people are more susceptible to the flu and this may explain the seasonal variability in influenza since you generally have lower vitamin D in winter because of lower sun exposure which activates ingested vitamin D. So it looks like there is increasing evidence that vitamin D might be a helpful in prevention of influenza. If you are not vitamin D deficient, taking more vitamin D will not help and you will still be at risk of getting influenza. Just less risk than someone who is vitamin D deficient. Of course, vitamin D is not better than the influenza vaccine in prevent influenza infection

 

....double post ....

 

There are some facts which, whether related or not, can be stated.
The Amish generally do not vaccinate their children. In large Amish communities where vaccination is unheard of occurring there is no autism.
In the rest of the general population, vaccines have been reccommended, in most cases required.... most before entrance to school, for the 'traditional' diseases of childhood.
Since the 50's, there's been an increasing rise in the occurrence of autism in the general population. Whether the increasing rise in autism is due to better differientiating diagnostic techniques or not, the increase does seem acute enough to suggest some change in environmental exposure which are either causitive or trigger a latent disposition in those genetically susceptible..... iow, because the cause of autism isn't known.... nothing heretofore suspected hasn't been proven nor ruled out.
However, because of the controversy concerning the safety of repeated vaccinations with preparations dependant on mecury containing preservatives.... in recent years, mercury as a preservative has been banned from childhood vaccines usually given before the age of 6 y/o.
What risks these early childhood vaccines without the mercury preservative may cause is still disputed even among professional experts, and no one on this forum is an expert. At best we are each and all researchers for the truth dependant on the publishings and findings of others.

We bring to this forum, our own experiences and level of knowledge and whatever bias in our own filtering system as we each weigh for ourselves what is acceptible and what we discard as false. There has been no reason for us to abuse each other for our differences in opinion and our differing perspectives. There is no reason to abuse each other cause the truth is..... non of us can swear beyond a doubt that we know the truth....... because it may require a level of knowledge none of us can ever possess..... and only God knows for sure.

As a child, I had the DPT, for tetnus, diptheria and pertussus, the small pox vaccine and the polio vaccine..... the series and the oral. As an adult, I've had a tetnus booster, flu vaccines, pneumonia vaccine, and Hept B vaccine series. I had all the 'usual' childhood illnesses of chickepox, mumps, and measles. In recent years a titer was drawn to confirm immunity to measles: i still showed immunity. It was part of the physical screening required by the hospital where I worked as due to increased exposure risks we were required to keep shots up to date: Many of my co-workers who had never had measles and had taken the vaccine, did not have permanent immunity and their titers proved they had to retake to renew their immunity after some years. This is the biggest difference between nature's way or vaccination acquired immunity...... the later being a highly individual and therefore unpredictable of assurance when confronting possibilities of exposure to an outbreak. Having measles carries some risk, but in most children with a healthy immune system and proper nutrition, complications are rare and severe complications very rare...... But measles can be devastating to a woman who is pregnant and dependant on her vaccine history to protect her with immunity if a titer test comes up negative and she should be exposed to measles. With naturally acquired and permanent immunity, I would have no fears if I were pregnant cause in the womb the baby is protected by my immunity until his birth. Then he would be dependant on my protecting him from exposure until he had acquired some age and normal development or be vaccinated. Now days, we put our children in church nurserys so babies cry don't disturb worship...... and in day care so mom's can work. Our communities are large and blended and the way we live and cross terrotory in the course of a normal week, we are no longer isolated to a few controlled exposures to other that we know. Our circles of contacts are no longer limited to a few families where if one has a child or a relative with an infection it is the news and talk of all, shared for the benefit of those who either plan to be exposed or wishing to avoid exposure...... that was the 'old' way which to many readers on this forum may seem very primitive...... but as 'stupid' as some of you may think.... it shows that God gave our parents some wisdom and common sense which didn't take a degree in medicine. So it is a serious issue of modern life.... to vaccinate or not... and for what and when.

As for the vaccines now given in early childhood..... The hep B vaccine is not needed after birth based upon common sense and scientific fact: Hept B is caught by exchange of body fluids ....i.e. s@x, or dirty needles and infected blood......... none of which should put a baby or young child at risk. The other vaccines of childhood diseases may offer important protection due to the increased possibilities of exposure to potential infection due to our modern ways of living and communication.

The flu vaccine is a yearly event for those who choose to take them. Each year the vaccine must change because the virus morphs into a new strain..... but, that means detective work and making the best guess based upon studying the changes and new outbreaks by the virologists. Even then, while the vaccine is being prepared for 'this' years strain of virus.... the virus is continuing to change so that by the time a patient gets the vaccine, the flu which is going around may no longer be the one vaccinated for. Experts in the field say this and it is the reason they use to explain why people who were vaccinated still get the flu.

Does everyone need the flu vaccine every year. According to the experts you do if you want to avoid catching the flu that season. However, the flu vaccine may be different from the strain that's going around when you catch it which means it can't do you any good. But there are some who have worked in this field and have found that the flu vaccine may not be effective in preventing the flu even when the strain is right. So the question gets down to do you need to vaccinate every year? It's an individual question.

If one is immune compromised then they may be incapable of having a normal immune response to the vaccine to protect them even though their risks of complications may be greater than average if they don't vaccinate and catch the flu. The products used to grow the virus for production are also being injected into your body..... what kind of animal tissue? What if the tissue was also contaminated with cancer cells or other diseases which weren't intended to be injected but couldn't be separated out. Remember the allergy question concerning eggs? It is because a vaccine produced by using eggs to grow the virus may also carry egg proteins which can't be screened out when the vaccine is made. This is also true of other mediums used to grow the virus. If there is contamination of other pathogens....... these might also be given in the vaccine as there is no way to screen out and give a pure product. One of the reasons for a preservative is to prevent the growth of fungi, bacteria and other contaminants which might be present. Personally, I don't believe its a healthy practice to inject foreign substances into the body when the risk is low or the prevention so uncertain.

There are some other terms you may not be familiar with:
If something is called bacteroscidal..... it means it kills most common and many pathological bacteria. But it may not have any effect on bacteria spores. Bacteria spores survive conditions which would normally kill the bacteria.
Bacteriostatic means the product is capable of stopping bacteria division and growth... but doesn't kill and, if released from the concentration of the chemical into a supportive growth medium, may survive and retain the ability to cause disease.
Disinfectants..... kill some bacteria and viruses, but are bacterio static to some.
Most chemicals used to disinfect surfaces require gross cleaning preparation if badly soiled then covering with the disinfectant and maintaining a wet surface solution for a period recommended by directions on the product or a minimum of 10 minutes.

Hand sanitizers are great against the spread of pathogens as the friction of rubbing helps insure all areas are well covered and the chemicals get over around and through whatever is on the skin.....and may provide a barrier which resists growth of new contamination.... but is no replacement for good hand washing with brisk friction to all areas of the hands under running water. Both have their place. Frequent hand washing may promote dryness, chapping, and cracks in the skin which can capture and protect bacteria from being washed away. Hand sanitizers don't seem to cause chapping and often have emollients which help to fight dryness and chapping.

If one has the habit of rubbing eyes, nose, etc..... break the habit if possible, or try to be more aware, cleaning hands before and after. Some illnesses like the flu is capable of being spread on aresole droplets exploded into the air by uncovered coughs and sneezes.... but most infection is spread from hands to face.