mandatory drug use

[loki09789]

Ok but how do we KNOW for 100% sure that a child has ADHD or ADD? Do we really understand exactly what those two are. Or are they just a pseudonym for parental laziness and inattentiveness?

They are not pseudonyms for parental laziness and inattentiveness (qualify that to say that at least in the clinical/medical community ), there is clinical information to explain the physiological differences between a normal range of development and an ADHD/ADD type of development in a person's brain. The problem is that, like many medical terms, what currently is called ADHD/ADD has had many other names through history.

Another thing to consider is, if you were to compare driving a car to child rearing for the sake of analogy, if your child is more of a factory model car to represent the 'norm' range of development then the holes in parenting skills won't be so apparent. If your child is more of a high strung dragster or race car (not to imply superiority to the 'norm' but as example of 'out of the norm') that requires a more skilled touch, then the fact that your parenting skills are limited to folk levels of instruction (what you learn by watching your parents, others but not based on actual research and formal education) will become VERY apparent.

It takes more training/understanding/emotional control and a lot more personal awareness to raise an ADHD/ADD child and it takes some personal coping/preparation to deal with the internal experience as well because the children with a handicap need more.

The real 'miracle' is when parents of misdiagnosed children get the training and improve their parenting skills and the child suddenly is 'cured' of ADD/ADHD....which only leads to the mythical status/invalidity of how real ADHD is.

There is a clear prejudice/non acceptance for mental/developmental handicaps in the general public because ADD/ADHD/Clinical depression.... aren't as physically obvious as blindness, paralysis.... The general attitude I have come across is "there isn't anything wrong with those kids except for bad parenting and a swat across the bottom wouldn't cure." Though I agree that parenting skills need to be as passionately developed as some of us pursue our martial arts training, I don't think that ignoring the reality of ADD/ADHD and other mental handicaps helps. It leads to some serious false expectations of what these kids are and are not capable of and can really increase the negative self image that can come with knowing you are different.

I deal with these kids everyday and they know they are different. Their self perception/esteem depends quite a bit on how the world treats them and their condition. I constantly tell them that they are different (but even the 'normal' people are), but it isn't an excuse to quit, lower your life goals or to be bad. I also tell them that the meds are a helper, but not an excuse either. They are ultimately in charge of themselves. They may take longer, have to work harder in some areas than other kids, but they can be as accomplished as anyone else. I even cite how, after scientists have poured over bios of these people, some of the most successful people are folks who have channelled their 'handicap' into success like Einstein, Hawkings... and others who (though not in all cases ADD/ADHD) presented the same poor behavior, boredom, creativity... they just needed the right venue to express it in so they could shine.

 

[Nightingale]

when I was teaching, we had a student at another catholic school die of the measels. Because the parents thought the vaccines were linked to autism. So, they didn't get their kids vaccinated, and the kid died of measels.

I've done my research on the vaccine/autism link, and I believe there is one, and many researchers conclude, that, while there is a link, its due to the plethora of vaccines given at one time, plus a succeptibility to develop autism. The most common age for diagnosing autism is age 2. Many children develop normally until age 2, when they are given vaccines, and they become autistic. Approximately 40% of parents of autistic children believe vaccines are the culprit.

Interesting factoids: Most vaccines contain mercury. It's very interesting that the symptoms for autism and the symptoms for mercury poisoning are virtually identical...

When I have kids, they will get ONE vaccine at a time, even if I have to bring them back to the doc every three months so they can get all their shots. The most often accused vaccine is the MMR (measels, mumps, rubella). Some doctors are now offering this vaccine in three different shots, spread out over a longer period of time. This seems like a better option.

Every parent needs to make their own choice about HOW to vaccinate their kids. NOT whether. Kids must be vaccinated. Otherwise, we'll have people dying of polio, measels, mumps, etc. These diseases are under control at this time, and we need to keep them that way.

 

[Phoenix44]

Many children develop normally until age 2, when they are given vaccines, and they become autistic.

Really? The first vaccine is usually given at age 2 MONTHS, and the primary series of all the vaccines (Diphtheria, Tetanus, Pertussis, Hepatitis B, Hemophilus, Measles, Mumps, Rubella) is COMPLETED by age 18 months.

 

[Nightingale]

What I meant was that autism was normally diagnosed around age 2, AFTER the vaccine cycle was completed. Autism begins as a regressive disease. It's gradual. The child develops normally for a while, and then begins to have minor problems which get worse and worse... a child does not go from normal to suddenly majorly autistic. It happens over time, and many people believe it is triggered by a particular vaccine.

Autism, MMR and "60 Minutes"

A Perspective by Dr. Edward Yazbak
The following is an article written by Dr. Edward Yazabak in 2000.

The "60 Minutes" program on MMR vaccine was an excellent awareness-raising report on the debate surrounding regressive autism and its explosion.

First, my background: I am trained in infectious diseases and pediatrics.

During my training I personally cared for children and adults with serious and complicated contagious illnesses. I subsequently “really” practiced pediatrics and was a school physician for 34 years. I personally administered my own vaccines and enforced every Health Department mandate. I also informed myself thoroughly about regressive or late onset autism. Because of research I am now conducting, I strongly suspect that there is an autism-vaccine connection.

The following crucial facts were unfortunately not discussed in the 60 Minutes piece:

The measles virus was isolated from the gut wall of children with autism. It was further identified by very precise PCR techniques by O’Leary, and was confirmed to be of vaccine origin by Kawashima and his group.
Sixty new cases with autistic enterocolitis were reported by Wakefield in the September 2000 issue of the "American Journal of Gastroenterology."
Children with autism have statistically significant co-existing high titers of MMR and Myelin Basic Protein antibodies.

The authorities like to repeat that Wakefield’s findings have not been duplicated by other researchers. This may be true for the case of children with autism but only because no one has tried to. Indeed after seeing the onslaught of attacks on Dr. Wakefield because of his research, it is unlikely that anyone would want to. Sabra et al at Georgetown University, however, have described identical ileal lymphoid nodular hyperplasia in the guts of children with ADHD.

Thousands of parents believe that the MMR vaccine has contributed to their children’s autism. They have pictures and videos to prove the ‘before’ and ‘after.’ They speak of the MMR being the only new event in their child’s life in that period between normal development and autistic regression. They point out their children’s marked immune system dysfunction, something with which they were not born. These parents certainly did not acquire their conviction from reading about the twelve cases reported in Dr. Wakefield’s first paper. Nor would they simply be looking for a scapegoat. Please remember, and always remember, their children were normal and their disease is acquired.

Regardless of how often the authorities attest that the MMR vaccine is safe, an increasing number of parents here and in Europe are refusing to believe them. Safety trials not looking beyond 3 weeks post-vaccination convince no one. Equally alarming to the parents is the fact that the infectious disease specialists and epidemiologists who make decisions and mandate vaccines have little knowledge of autism and its immune etiology.

It is inevitable that the present intransigent and unbending attitude of the vaccine authorities will lead to measles, mumps and rubella outbreaks. When these diseases return, and they will, the authorities-- and the authorities alone-- will have to be held responsible. There is no reasonable justification to tell a parent who is adamant about not using MMR but who is willing to return three times for the monovalent vaccines, that they are simply not available and/or illegal. Dr. Wakefield only asked that more research be done into the triple live-virus vaccine. To intimate that his research will cause epidemics is a flagrant distortion of the truth.

It took us a long time to perfect the single (monovalent) mumps, measles and rubella vaccines. Most pediatricians and parents trusted them. Epidemics stopped and few adverse vaccine reactions were reported.

When the MMR vaccine was licensed in 1971 and became available shortly thereafter, many pediatricians refused to use it and continued vaccinating with the monovalent products at 3-6 months intervals. These pediatricians were concerned with the potential decreased efficacy and increased side effects of the combination. Many of us were also aware that no long-term safety studies of the MMR vaccine were available, on going or contemplated.

Two things happened simultaneously in the late seventies to change things dramatically:
HMOs arrived on the scene and cut down the number of “regular check-ups”
The State Health Departments started providing the vaccines free of charge to the practicing pediatricians and GPs. The Health Departments made it clear that it was cheaper to buy and easier to store and distribute the 3 in 1 vaccine and, on that basis, simply mandated its use. Pediatricians had no choice but to comply.

To say that we are not sure the parents will bring the child back for subsequent shots is false. Certainly this argument could be made in a third world country but certainly not in the West. Any “practicing” pediatrician knows that a parent is much more likely to keep a doctor’s appointment if a vaccine is due.

Sponsored Links
Thimerosal Litigation
Autism & Mercury Poisoning Claims due to Thimerosal Vaccinations
www.Thimerosal-Legal.com

Autism
Discover the underlying cause of fungal yeast infections.
http://www.candidafree.net

Toddlers w/ Autism or PDD
Vocabulary Builder videos can help your child learn to speak.
www.babybumblebee.com
One must be cautious not to insult parents’ intelligence.

Secondly, to say that added injections will cause pain and discomfort to the child is ridiculous. I believe that the pain caused by an aqueous injection administered sub-cutaneously by an experienced health professional does not even come close to the living hell of Autism.

Interestingly, the only people who raise these two arguments are members of vaccine boards and committees and rarely treat patients. Wouldn’t it be more appropriate to have the parents make that important choice if they have such marked reservations? After all it is their child. As well, it seems hypocritical to mention pain when the vaccine authorities are introducing new vaccines of questionable efficacy and safety all the time.

It was intimated on "60 Minutes" that a multitude of studies involving large populations has proved that the MMR vaccine was perfectly safe and did not cause autism. THIS IS NOT TRUE. There is NO long-term safety research proving that MMR does not cause autism. There is a sole epidemiological study by Taylor et al, often publicized as proving decisively that autism did not increase in the UK after 1988, when MMR was introduced with great fanfare. This study was financed and ordered by The Medicines Control Agency and The Public Health Laboratory Service.

A noted British statistician whose specialty is medical research, looked carefully at the Taylor study. He wrote: “A myth is being created that the Taylor et al study shows that MMR is not triggering autism. The evidence presented in their Lancet paper is [in fact] consistent with the MMR triggering a substantial proportion of autism cases in this North London population. The study does not find evidence to support an association between MMR and autism onset because of a flaw in the study design. This does not mean that such an association does not exist.”

The reason for this expert’s comments is that the “case series design” used in the Taylor study is well known to be statistically unsatisfactory for chronic conditions and inadequate for a small sample (293 confirmed cases). Even the authors of the study themselves alluded to its methodological problems.


At times, while figures clearly demonstrate an increase in autism, this fact is denied in the written text. At others, contradictions are evident:
“There is uncertainty about whether the prevalence of autism is increasing,” immediately followed by: “Our study is consistent with an increase in the incidence of autism in recent birth cohorts.”
"For age at first parental concern, no significant temporal clustering was seen for cases of core autism and atypical autism, with the exception of a single interval within 6 months of MMR vaccine associated with a peak in reported age of parental concern at 18 months,” and “Our results do not support the hypothesis that MMR vaccination is causally related to autism."

By far, however, the Taylor study’s most serious problem was to look only at children born after 1987. This effectively excluded all children born in 1986-87 and initially vaccinated in 1988 or later. It also excluded all 2–5 year old children previously non- or partially immunized and who received MMR boosters in 1988 or later. More importantly, this design flaw added all excluded children to the opposite group.

Last but not least, Dr. Taylor has repeatedly refused to let anyone see his raw data, in the hopes of replicating his findings, thus becoming probably the first author in the history of the "Lancet" to do so.

In sum, the ‘authorities’ need to get away from rhetoric. They must look at and commission real science to support their claims. Until the safety of the MMR vaccine is proved conclusively, it will be wise to allow parents a choice between the single vaccines and the trivalent MMR. All of us who have been touched by the autism epidemic appreciate the efforts put forth by CBS and "60 Minutes." We hope that numerous and more balanced, informative programs will follow.

 

[shesulsa]

Thank you for posting that, Kris.

For the record, I think my son was injured from his first two rounds of vaccines received at 2 months and 4 months. After that, he had no more immunizations...interestingly, he has been exposed to measles many times, but never developed the disease...but no doctor I can find will test him for titers because they want me to just give him the shot since, as they so delicately put it, "the damage is already done."

I don't think John developed autism overnight - there were some factors that did seem as though they developed overnight - the one that grabbed me was one day I could hug and cuddle him and tickle him, etcetera...literally, the next day, he couldn't bear to be even near anyone. Other symptoms such as acting deaf, lack of imitation, word loss developed earlier. I do have pictures of my son at 8 weeks looking at me in the eyes and grinning and laughing, he responded to sound, tracked objects with his eyes, however, after the innoculations, he no longer did those things. Obvious milestones were met, though such as crawling, walking, sitting up, pulling up, etcetera...so it's hard for me to say what is and isn't true when it comes to other parents' opinions that the autism hit overnight.

I do know that the amount of tin in my son's urine is extremely high which means he is not dumping mercury as most people do...which would affect the bile production, which would affect food digestion, which would affect gut peptides, which would leave certain proteins and fats in a state which mimics opiates, which cross the blood-brain barrier in the intestines and cause the gut to "leak", which affects the brain chemistry, which affects development, which affects behavior.

So you all know, autism is probably not caused by one thing alone (my humble opinion), and it probably has a lot to do with susceptibility to certain ingredients in vaccines, medications, and could also just develop independently. And autism also is diagnosed behaviorally - there is no known genetic marker, though there are some definite leanings right now.

In my son's case, I don't think he only has autism, he definately has some cerebral palsy, indicated by hypotonia and hypoflexivity, certain muscular difficulties. I definitely believe he was vaccine-damaged.

I don't think medication should be federally mandated for several reasons...I've already stated my case about the boy with ADHD that this thread originated with and I've stated my case about this...I do owe some figures to the thread, though and will provide those as soon as I can.
If I knew I could safely vaccinate all my children without them becoming permanently damaged, I would do it in a heartbeat. So...allergists? Immunologists? Developmental Pediatricians? Are you out there? Cuz the ones within a 300 mile radius of me won't walk down that path with me. If you truly believe in protecting my children against disease and death and disorder, point me in the right direction - the safe vaccination direction.

Thank you.

 

[hardheadjarhead]

The general attitude I have come across is "there isn't anything wrong with those kids except for bad parenting and a swat across the bottom wouldn't cure." Though I agree that parenting skills need to be as passionately developed as some of us pursue our martial arts training, I don't think that ignoring the reality of ADD/ADHD and other mental handicaps helps. It leads to some serious false expectations of what these kids are and are not capable of and can really increase the negative self image that can come with knowing you are different.

Excellent post, and I couldn't agree more.

I deal with a large number of these kids. So far Autism seems to have explosively outpaced ADD/ADHD.

I think the two were confused for awhile (and still are). Children in the autism spectrum are often misdiagnosed as ADD/ADHD.

The original post had to do with the government requiring the administration of certain drugs. Without certain meds, a child facing these issues can become suicidally depressed. Parents that ignore the meds can place the child at risk.

That said, there is a point where the government has to back off. In the case mentioned in the original post, this seems to be one of those times. The rights of the parent in this instant would seem to be paramount. If the risk to the child isn't a "clear and present danger", I'd argue that enforced medication would be a bad move on the part of the state. I'd also argue that in this case and future cases the courts would likely take that stance.

Yet what if the child were bi-polar? A battery of meds might be needed to keep him/her from suicide. Would the state then be justified in enforcing such medication? Or do we allow the family its autonomy? And if the child dies a suicide? I suppose at that point one could argue that the state can not be responsible for diagnosing and treating all depressed children. It could lead to the slippery slope of the state deciding that we ALL need to be medicated for whatever ills the state determines we suffer from.

That likely won't happen. I suspect we will task the family with bearing the responsibility and burden of guilt for their neglect.


Regards,


Steve

 

[Phoenix44]

OK, let me play the Devil's Advocate. Suppose a child's behavior without medication is so disruptive--screaming, badgering other kids, kicking teachers, running around the school hallways, hanging off the stairways--that he cannot be taught in a classroom. (I'm not making up this scenario, I witnessed it in a school). So, not only is he making it impossible for other kids to learn, but he cannot learn either. And of course, if you remove him from school, he also cannot learn. Not to mention the physical danger to himself and others because of his behavior.

Medicate or not?

 

[OULobo]

OK, let me play the Devil's Advocate. Suppose a child's behavior without medication is so disruptive--screaming, badgering other kids, kicking teachers, running around the school hallways, hanging off the stairways--that he cannot be taught in a classroom. (I'm not making up this scenario, I witnessed it in a school). So, not only is he making it impossible for other kids to learn, but he cannot learn either. And of course, if you remove him from school, he also cannot learn. Not to mention the physical danger to himself and others because of his behavior.

Medicate or not?

Not if it causes lack of appitite, sleep or other damaging side effects. Now you are talking about sacrificing the child's health for it's chance at schooling that no one can garuntee with be effective on him anyway. Look into alternative options like, home schooling, specilized education options, ect. Special cases need special care.

 

[OUMoose]

OK, let me play the Devil's Advocate. Suppose a child's behavior without medication is so disruptive--screaming, badgering other kids, kicking teachers, running around the school hallways, hanging off the stairways--that he cannot be taught in a classroom. (I'm not making up this scenario, I witnessed it in a school). So, not only is he making it impossible for other kids to learn, but he cannot learn either. And of course, if you remove him from school, he also cannot learn. Not to mention the physical danger to himself and others because of his behavior.

Medicate or not?

My mother has taught special education for almost 20 years now, and has seen many children like this (I've even helped at the school). Some children do have a specific medical problem, and some medication would help, but not the painfully obvious overmedication that is almost the norm anymore. Yes, in this case, a special type of schooling would probably be necessary, and hopefully the child would grow out of it. Most of them I've seen like this are under 2nd grade, but I have heard of cases all the way till around 5th or 6th grade. Since I've only had direct exposure to the youngins, though, that's what I'll stick to.

 

[loki09789]

OK, let me play the Devil's Advocate. Suppose a child's behavior without medication is so disruptive--screaming, badgering other kids, kicking teachers, running around the school hallways, hanging off the stairways--that he cannot be taught in a classroom. (I'm not making up this scenario, I witnessed it in a school). So, not only is he making it impossible for other kids to learn, but he cannot learn either. And of course, if you remove him from school, he also cannot learn. Not to mention the physical danger to himself and others because of his behavior.

Medicate or not?

That is a parents decision, whether to use meds. THe school can only say that the child will not be allowed back into a mainstream classroom after a series of reports and such about this kind of behavior. Remember, even in the original post it was mentioned, that meds are NOT the only answer but part of a management system. The school can only recommend that a child would benefit from a different learning environment (separated classes, assigned special ed. teacher, alternate school entirely...) but the funding for such costs that the school will incur comes from classifying the child special education....

The rub is whether the state has the right to charge a parent with child endangerment if, after having the child classified and acknowledging that these extra helpers (including meds) are needed to give the child an equal and fair learning opportunity, the parent refused to provide any one of them to the child. If the school were to refuse to provide special teachers, extra test taking time, ... they could be in big trouble. School systems are regarded as guardian/parents of children (in locus parenti) and can be held accountable, why not the parent?

Seeking alternatives, finding different ways are fine with me. Flat out refusing with no other safety net is just not moral or right. There are lots of meds that might have been better. THere are schools that are specifically designed for kids with special needs....

Again, what if a parent took away his kids wheel chair or colostomy bag (sp?) without seeking or intending to provide an alternative?

 

[Phoenix44]

Remember, even in the original post it was mentioned, that meds are NOT the only answer but part of a management system.

If the school were to refuse to provide special teachers, extra test taking time, ... they could be in big trouble.

There are schools that are specifically designed for kids with special needs....

Well, in this case, the school is part of a system with a very well defined and funded special ed program, but this child is in no position to benefit from extended test time, special ed teachers, resource room, barrier free school or any other "learning" environment I can think of, because his behavior will prevent him from learning, and may be the cause of harm to himself and others.

Again, what if a parent took away his kids wheel chair or colostomy bag (sp?) without seeking or intending to provide an alternative?

Exactly. I'm not saying it's an easy decision--hey, I have kids, too. But for some kids the meds work, and even the kids will tell so.

I'm not talking about the spoiled brat with overindulgent parents...I'm talking about kids with serious learning and behavior disorders, which we are beginning to learn have an organic basis.

 

[shesulsa]

"The rub is whether the state has the right to charge a parent with child endangerment if, after having the child classified and acknowledging that these extra helpers (including meds) are needed to give the child an equal and fair learning opportunity, the parent refused to provide any one of them to the child. If the school were to refuse to provide special teachers, extra test taking time, ... they could be in big trouble. School systems are regarded as guardian/parents of children (in locus parenti) and can be held accountable, why not the parent?"

Sure - give the school the authority to mandate meds...then when the child has serious health problems because of the meds, will the school be charged with child endangerment? no...

"Seeking alternatives, finding different ways are fine with me. Flat out refusing with no other safety net is just not moral or right. There are lots of meds that might have been better. THere are schools that are specifically designed for kids with special needs...."

I still find it interesting that everyone thinks it's a simple as taking a pill....it's just not. There are side effects to these medications, interactions with simple cold medications, there's depression to deal with since they know they're different (usually, they do)...the alternatives are EXTREMELY hard to come by - if the school isn't cooperative (and it sounds like this school isn't), and the parent and school can't agree to placement, the next step is mediation which is usually just a head-butting contest to see who is going to outlast who, then it goes on to "fair trial" where the parents RARELY win and the school gets their way anyway which is THEIR opinion of what is appropriate for the child - not necessarily BEST - just APPROPRIATE...and that is a broad term given they have too much power. And what is best for this child will be lost in red tape.

Just curious - does anyone else on this thread besides me have a challenged child?

 

[rmcrobertson]

1. Children need to be vaccinated.

2. Most of the theories about autism being caused by vaccination appear to be--yes, they've checked--flat out untrue.

3. The fact that we overmedicate is simply one more symptom of the extent to which, as a society, we are too cheap and too misdirected to spend the money and put in the time that kids--and schools--need.

If you think I'm woofin', remember that we could in fact ensure that every kid in this country has enough to eat, a decent education, and a decent start in life. Instead, we vote and vote and vote to cut taxes.

Here's the dirty secret: all this stuff costs money. Until we're willing to ante up and sit down and plan rationally--we actually have lunatics turning back Head Start funds for poor kids because it's, "against God's will," to have pre-school breakfasts, for cryin' out loud!--we will not change anything.

Most of the stuff in K-12 education that everybody quite properly complains about--including the stupid waste--comes out of trying to do everything on the cheap.

 

[shesulsa]

Sigh.

1. Children need to be vaccinated.

SAFELY vaccinated.

2. Most of the theories about autism being caused by vaccination appear to be--yes, they've checked--flat out untrue.

I never said that I thought vaccines cause autism...and those studies saying it isn't true are done by the manufacturers, mostly...and the only independent study ever done proved that mercury toxicity is the likely factor.

3. The fact that we overmedicate is simply one more symptom of the extent to which, as a society, we are too cheap and too misdirected to spend the money and put in the time that kids--and schools--need.

If you think I'm woofin', remember that we could in fact ensure that every kid in this country has enough to eat, a decent education, and a decent start in life. Instead, we vote and vote and vote to cut taxes.

Here's the dirty secret: all this stuff costs money. Until we're willing to ante up and sit down and plan rationally--we actually have lunatics turning back Head Start funds for poor kids because it's, "against God's will," to have pre-school breakfasts, for cryin' out loud!--we will not change anything.

Most of the stuff in K-12 education that everybody quite properly complains about--including the stupid waste--comes out of trying to do everything on the cheap.

Points on which we agree.

 

[Phoenix44]

- if the school isn't cooperative (and it sounds like this school isn't)[/color]

Actually, the school IS cooperative. Full time RN on staff, school psychologist, social worker, and a well organized special ed system. The parent is not cooperative. "Forgets" to give medicaton in the morning, and the child is completely out of control. I didn't exaggerate when I said he runs around the school, screams, attacks people, and hangs from the stairways.

I picked an extreme--but not rare--example, because he made such an impression on me. Remember, in the inner city, we're dealing with the crack babies of a few years ago. Now they're in school. I'm not referring to the kids who need smaller classes, less distraction, and extended test time. I'm talking about the kids who disrupt the smaller, special ed classes.

 

[rmcrobertson]

"...and those studies saying it isn't true are done by the manufacturers, mostly...and the only independent study ever done proved that mercury toxicity is the likely factor..."

I am sorry, but this simply isn't accurate. Please take a look at the Internet sources: major studies were done in Denmark on MMR vaccines and autism, and showed no link; no study I've see in the last four-five years has demonstrated any correclation, let alone causation.

Another such study came out last month: same conclusion, no link. You might want to check the CDC website on this.

 

[shesulsa]

You know, sir, you're really beginning to tick me off. I have read studies translated into English for me on vaccinations - I've been reading about vaccination studies - both sides - every day for the last fourteen years. You clearly are slanted to mass, mandatory, indescriminate vaccination which borderlines on fascism.

Look, you're entitled to your ignorant opinion, but you need to understand that my opinion, having had experience in this realm, carries more weight than yours. You may be a "black belt" on this board and you may or may not outrank me in arts, but I clearly hold higher consideration than you in these matters. You clearly buy all the B.S. you're fed by government agencies that are supposed to be there to protect you...whether you want to be protected or not.

Studies - bottom line - don't mean s**t. Statistics don't mean s**t. What does, is the Hyppocratic oath - FIRST DO NO HARM. And your suggestion, that all children need to get shot up with whatever anyone has to offer without regard to their unique health situation, indicates your lack of value on human life and dignity.

How about my tetanus shot - should it be federally mandated? If it were, it would kill me. I recently stepped on a filty upholstery needle, and it jammed, eye-first, into my foot. I react to the dyphtheria toxoid in DPT and DT shots. Hospitals are supposed to carry Tt, right? So is the health department right? Guess what? No one in Washington State nor Oregon State nor Northern California had my dyphtheria-free tetanus toxoid available. The reason I got from them is that it is so rarely needed without the dyph they just don't stock it anymore and it's good for only a few months. But the ER nurse said she sees it often and most people like me just do without the shot period...got that? They risk tetanus. Now, since you're so friggin' knowledgable about these things, I'm sure you know that tetanus is very, very bad to get and difficult to treat. My doctor, whom I hire to help me stay healthy, told me I was just going to have to either risk tetanus or get the Dt shot - anaphylaxis, that is. So they all shrugged and sent me on my way - except one doctor. That one doctor (out of, what, thousands?) prescribed me the TT vaccine. I went to an independent pharmacy who phoned the manufacturer who was MORE than willing to ship it by Federal Express. I paid $155 dollars for a 10-dose vial and $35 dollars for overnight shipping and got my shot by the same doctor right at the 72 hour deadline. The remaining doses I donated to the county health department who said they desperately needed them "for all those people who can't take the dyph." "Many of them?" says I. "Oh, you wouldn't believe it," says she.

When my doctor - whom I pay lots of money to help me stay healthy - told me to risk the unmentionable - he actually had the nerve to tell me I needed to get my already-vaccine-damaged son ... vaccinated for High School. The same people who were willing to let me risk serious illness and possible death are hounding me to shoot up my kid with live measles. SCREW THEM.

Don't insult me by pushing your ignorant opinion when you clearly don't know what you're really talking about - you just know what you've been told.

Now - could we have a moderator move the vaccine debate to an independent thread? I hate to continue this discussion here when the initial thread was on mandated meds for an ADHD child. Thank you.

 

[rmcrobertson]

Well, and you HAVE offended me.

I apologize, I only looked at the CDC website and checked out the Denmark studies, etc.

The revealing thing is what you wrote is that the studies and the stats don't mean nothing. OK, fine: you've just heaved the science out the window, and you're left with personal experience, books, and those guys on TV who tell you that AIDS is a big fat fake, and you can cure aging with anti-oxidants. regrettably, the science cannot guarantee results, only probabilities: that's what science is.

Vaccinations are one of the few things the medical establishment does RIGHT, and you're arguing against them. Fine. Your privilege, and I am terribly sorry about your son.


I guarantee that for every story you tell, I can dig up around three zillion concerning kids and moms dying in, say, India for want of basic medical care like vaccines.
However, the facts are that vaccinations are the best way we have to protect the overwhelming majority of the public.

I note that you did not wish to discuss either a) paying for all the screenings, b) going back to the Good Old Days cited by the CDC.

As for the assertion that I Am AN Ignorant Tool of The Government, well, wow. That sure fits with other things I've wrotten on this thread.

I will shaddup on this now, as I do not care for further insults, or to risk further annoying someone with your level of horrible personal experience.

 

[hardheadjarhead]

While I'm not sure Shesulsa's level of vitriol was an appropriate response to RMCRobertson's post (still I found something admirable in its crafting and intensity), it was an understandable reaction given her experiences.

I work with a large number of children with autism whose parents express similar frustration in dealing with the authorities. Many of them believe, as Shesulsa does, that the MMR vaccine (and perhaps others) damaged their children. With a 275% increase in autism over the last decade, one can't blame them for believing it. Some environmental influence is causing this...and the powers that be don't seem to have the answers...or want to give them

RMC, you have to understand what parents like her go through. Parenting a child with autism is extremely taxing. Then dealing with improperly trained teachers, facing school administrators that don't want to provide legally mandated resources for these children...this wears a parent down.

The frustration Shesulsa expresses towards physicians is new to me...and I like to think that this isn't universal and that the physicians in our town have a better grasp of the situation. A number of them have kids with autism, so that might be the case.

It is a digression...but government mandated vaccines come in another form. The military's compulsory vaccinations. The recent rash of suicides among soldiers serving in Iraq and Afghanistan is being attributed to a the administration of an anti-malarial drug. "Gulf War Syndrome" has also been blamed on vaccinations...neither allegation has yet born fruit. Bottom line: People are getting awfully leery of needles, and taking umbrage when the government mandates they take a shot.


Regards,


Steve

 

[Phoenix44]

With a 275% increase in autism over the last decade,

Citation, please?