Where do you stand on vaccinations?

so I would like to know, GregH, do you now also think that most supplements are worthless, perhaps even harmful? One of my midwifery teachers said she thinks most supplements are just good for making expensive urine.

? what do you think? And this is a serious question.

I don’t think most supplements are harmful but let’s just say that if there was no such thing as a placebo effect, the supplement market would be in trouble.

That being said, there are legitimate supplements with real science behind them. There are organizations that keep track of all the clinical studies and over time can rate what works and what does not. We used one service like that that would rate ingredients from A to F for a given health condition based on the clinical trials in existence. Very few “A”s but some. Other ingredients that are very widely believed to be useful have “C” ratings or worse.

Some supplements are really mild versions of drugs. Red yeast rice for example is a statin drug in a weak form. The problem is that because it is a supplement, it is not regulated like a drug and can be dangerous due to inconsistent manufacturing that would never occur in the drug industry.

I also voted “other” based on their being no option for all vaccines recommended by the doctor. Our son (first child) is now 4 weeks old and will be getting every vaccine the dr tells us we should get. I have been in the military 20 years and have had to get multiple reiterations of the same vaccinations many times. I have even had the full course of Anthrax and annual boosters, which is far more painful than any of the standard vaccines required in the U.S., as well as having to get vaccinated twice for smallpox, because they lost my initial record of the vaccination. I have read the anti-vax studies and am completely not convinced. They never take into account the community effect of vaccinations that they are benefitting from, and as has been mentioned before, the fact that while there are cases where the vaccines don’t work (which they love to tout), those people are better protected by having large numbers of vaccinated people around them to keep them away from that disease. We like to travel around the world, and I am not going to risk my son’s health in areas where there is much greater risk than in the U.S. by not having him vaccinated, or put other people’s lives at risk here in the U.S. by him possibly being a carrier for something that puts another person at risk.

As far as general medications go, Ibuprofen works far better than any homeopathic remedy, to take away knee pain after a long run!

[Ben Howard]

As far as general medications go, Ibuprofen works far better than any homeopathic remedy, to take away knee pain after a long run!

There is good reason for that. Of all the natural supplements, homeopathy is the most quacky. Totally ridiculous.

I probably used the wrong term there Greg. I have yet to find any natural supplement that works as a pain killer like Ibuprofen, and I have friends and family that love to try to convince me of their natural remedies for things. Of course based on your knowledge of the industry, you may know some legitimate products that are good substitutes for NSAIDS. Personally, I have found that 800 MG (prescription dosage) of Ibuprofen is pretty much a cure all :)

Life is imperfect, and all benefits come with a cost. People lament the gasoline engine because of smog and global warming. People lament pesticides and GMO foods because they poison rivers and it just ain’t natural. They fear vaccinations because of the very real (but small) risk of serious side effects.

But the big picture screams for gasoline engines, pesticides, GMO foods, and vaccinations. In the industrial world, we live longer, healthier, much more convenient lives.

My wife contracted Guillain–Barré syndrome, most likely from a flu vaccine. It was scary and expensive, but I would take it any day in exchange for the eradication of Polio and Small Pox.

I think this is a case of missing the forest for the trees. Sure, everybody has the right to make their own decisions for their own bodies. But let’s not be so myopic that we miss the big picture.

Ed, the problem with the poll is that there really isn’t an answer for the person who says they will get whatever vaccines are the currently medically recommended vaccines or just a simple, I am for giving my kids vaccines. See what I mean with my responses below.

I am generally against them and did not/would not vaccinate my chlldren. - obviously doesn’t work
I am for the most essential ones (not measles or chicken pox, for example) - still doesn’t work if you are for vaccines

I am for the ones required for public schools but do not hold others to that standard - most states only require a bare minimum compared to those encouraged
I am for them as a rule, and believe failing to vaccinate our children gives Christians a bad name - best fits my view, except I don’t think it necessarily gives a Christian a bad name to disagree with my view; there are unsaved people who disagree with vaccinations

I am against some or all of them but have my children vaccinated to be a team player. - obviously doesn’t fit
I have changed my mind one way or another on the issue (explain)- also no
I am only for older children or adult vaccinations - and no

[Ben Howard]

I probably used the wrong term there Greg. I have yet to find any natural supplement that works as a pain killer like Ibuprofen, and I have friends and family that love to try to convince me of their natural remedies for things. Of course based on your knowledge of the industry, you may know some legitimate products that are good substitutes for NSAIDS. Personally, I have found that 800 MG (prescription dosage) of Ibuprofen is pretty much a cure all :)

Yes, homeopathy is a particular strain of natural supplements that is just hokey. But in answer to your question, no, there is nothing in the supplement world that will substitute for ibuprofen. Supplements all work like chisels while drugs (including ibuprofen) work like sledgehammers. There is a time and place for both.

As another example, it is always interesting to me to people claim that taking Vitamin C while having a cold helps them get rid of it fast. There is no scientific evidence that is possible. Vitamin C is an antioxidant that might help the body fight off some sickness but there is no way taking Vitamin C once sick is going to make any kind of fast impact. In cases where people claim it does, I chalk it up to placebo effect.

Supplements can often supplement good health but I don’t think it very responsible to push people away from drugs toward them when a serious health situation occurs.

Vickie asked:

I understand the reasoning behind choosing not to use the vaccine, but it raises a larger question in my mind…one that perhaps has been discussed and I missed it. In the early 1960’s a mother decides to abort (murder) her unborn child. A doctor takes some of the tissues from that aborted (murdered) baby and begins research that leads to a stem-cell line that is used in the production of a vaccine that has at the very least saved hundreds of thousands of children from unnecessary suffering, saved others from serious complications, saved others from death, and has saved yet others from shingles and the complications it brings. What if the mother had chosen not to abort (murder) that baby? What if the child had been born and lived to be two years old and then was cruelly murdered by the mother’s boyfriend with her approval? What if the mother, in an act of remorse, decided to allow the child’s body to be donated to science for research? Or, what if she allowed the child’s organs and tissues to be given to save the lives of others in need of transplants? Would there be any difference and if so, why would this scenario be different than the use of the aborted fetal tissue to save lives? If there is no difference, then why is it okay to use the organs and tissues of older children and adults who die?

Vickie’s question raises a valid point. We too were bothered by vaccines that came from aborted babies, but then we found out that they are not continuing to harvest fetuses to make the vaccine, but that it simply came from one fetus a long time ago. It was terrible that a person had to be murdered in order for this vaccine to be developed and I would never want that to happen again, but now that we have the vaccine, I do not discourage others from using it. From what I understand, we put more human life at risk by buying shoes made oversees in sweat shops than we do by using vaccines developed from human fetuses.

Bill Gates’ involvement in vaccines and the third world creeps me out. If even half of what is reported about this is true, it’s just terrible wickedness.

If anyone knows that what’s reported about him, his foundation, vaccines in 3rd world countries is not true, can you please let me know?

[christian cerna]

One more thing, have you ever read the warning label on a prescription drug bottle? It will sound something like…

Beware, this drug may cause harmful side effects such a nausea, vomitting, dizziness, dry mouth, ulcers, kidney disease, liver damage, high blood pressure, fainting, stroke, depression, mood swings, and even death.

Sounds wonderful. Where can I get some??

Yet you will belittle someone who wants to try a natural remedy or suplement that has been proven for centuries to work, and has no real harmful side effects. And you call us crazy???

As someone who has worked in the pharma industry for over 15 years, the warning labels are a sham. They are required under law that any condition that appears during a trial of a drug has to be recorded and placed on a label regardless of whether it is related to a drug. For example, you will almost always see nausea or headaches on labels. Why? because most clinical trial patients have to stop taking caffeine based products such as coffee. If you drink coffee and you stop cold turkey, what happens? Gee Wheez you get a headache and you sometimes have nausea. What is even funnier is that almost all of the side effects you see on labels, also occurred to those on placebo’s.

[Anne Sokol]

[GregH]

Yes, 1 out 1,000 have nausea in a study and because it might possibly be connected to the drug, the FDA forces them to put it on the label. That is the way it often works. If you would refuse to take a helpful drug because there is a slight chance of dizziness, that is your prerogative of course. But over all, drugs have real data behind them and they are safe.

You want to give the rigorous process and scientific research behind drugs for natural remedies that “have worked for centuries”? Let me tell you how that industry often works. Somebody with a theory or legend about a supposed natural remedy throws it into capsules and is selling it a month later. There is very often no data, no studies, and no oversight.

By the way, supplements have side effects too. There is just no requirement to put them on the label.

i dont get the idea that pharmeceutical drugs have a lot of positive research behind them. and it is also essential to see who did the research, in what country it was conducted, and in what monetary way that organization is connected to the promotion of the drug.

Again, Anne, coming from the pharma industry. It takes about $1 billion to bring a drug to market. Most of that money is spent on clinical trials. When we sent a completed clinical trial to the FDA office in D.C. (before electronic files were sent) the amount of paper literally filled a 15’ moving truck. I have pictures of many of our products going to the FDA filling these trucks. We would send two going two different routes to ensure that if an accident happens we could still file what is called an NDA with the FDA.

Most health products have absolutely no defined clinical trials done, and the ones they mention are extremely weak. There are no safety protocols. People can die and get poisoned and there is nothing the FDA can do, although recently Congress has started giving them laws to help enforce this stuff. Don’t buy into the junk you always read.

Our lawsuit-rich environment has stripped warning labels of any meaning. It is like the boy who cried wolf. Now, if a product actually needs a warning label or disclaimer, who is really going to read it?

where are they conducted, do you know? i mean, in what countries?

one issue I know more closely, about Hep C. in the drug world, there is no cure. it’s an incurable disease.

but in the world (at large) there are cures. some of which are still illegal in the States, but you could go to another country and get them.

[Anne Sokol]

Bill Gates’ involvement in vaccines and the third world creeps me out. If even half of what is reported about this is true, it’s just terrible wickedness.

If anyone knows that what’s reported about him, his foundation, vaccines in 3rd world countries is not true, can you please let me know?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewherper/2011/11/02/the-second-coming-…

Sounds like he used to see population control as a means to decreasing suffering. Now, he sees longevity as a means to natural population control, and thus, decreased suffering.

I don’t drink coffee, yet I have often felt nausea or dizziness or dry mouth after taking prescription drugs. No matter what drug one takes, there is always that ‘drugged’ feeling we get after taking them.

I know of several people who have become addicted to pain medicines and sleep inducing drugs. Others have done serious damage to their livers and kidneys after taking drugs for several years. So to say that prescription drugs are not harmful is lunacy.

that in the forbes article, 1st or 2nd paragraph, Gates is distributing oral polio vaccine—putting drops in mouths.

… do we believe forbes?

do we believe the health-oriented groups? google brings up a lot of terrible stuff about the effects of that vaccine.

Israel is still deciding. In the U.S. you can’t use it though.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/protests-voiced-against-oral-polio-vaccina…

Isn’t aspirin made from an ingredient found naturally in tree bark? Isn’t that considered a natural remedy?

Garlic itself has been proven to be one of the best anti viral foods on the planet.

Doesn’t our government say that there is nothing wrong with putting fluoride in water? Yet other countries have banned the use of fluoride in water because they have found that it is toxic.

[Anne Sokol]

that in the forbes article, 1st or 2nd paragraph, Gates is distributing oral polio vaccine—putting drops in mouths.

… do we believe forbes?

do we believe the health-oriented groups? google brings up a lot of terrible stuff about the effects of that vaccine.

Israel is still deciding. In the U.S. you can’t use it though.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/protests-voiced-against-oral-polio-vaccina…

[QUOTE=Times of Israel] The Facebook page, which has over 700 members, cites two health experts who warned against using the live attenuated vaccine, also known as oral polio vaccine (OPV).[/QUOTE] Sounds like much ado about nothing. If I needed them, I could find two health experts to warn against eating my broccoli.

Yes, I give the Forbes article much more credibility than the alternative health groups. History demonstrates that vaccinations have been used to wipe out diseases and save millions of lives. From what I have seen, the “health-oriented groups” complain about the rare side-effects while pharmaceuticals are making the world a much better place to live.

[christian cerna]

Doesn’t our government say that there is nothing wrong with putting fluoride in water? Yet other countries have banned the use of fluoride in water because they have found that it is toxic.

This thread is now officially weird!

You guys do know that media is biased right? They are not going to speak badly about their biggest corporate sponsors? Pharmaceutical companies spend billions of dollars a year on advertising. It seems like 30% of the ads on television and in magazines is an ad for a new drug.

bolding mine

“I want the Ministry of Health to present high-level clinical research” confirming that the vaccine, which Gurman said had not been used in any Western country since 2009, was safe.

“We cannot settle for a position paper by a physician who might be receiving a salary from a pharmaceutical company as a consultant,” said Gurman.

…

She stated on her Facebook page that the previous version of OPV [oral polio vaccine] was discontinued and declared “dangerous” by Israel and other Western countries in 2005. The new version of the drug was developed in 2009, but according to Gurman had yet to be tested in the West.

Gurman also referred to British physician and immunization specialist [another one of those alternative medicine kooks :D] Dr. Richard Halvorsen, who claimed in his book “The Truth About Vaccines” that since 1970 OPV had caused more cases of paralysis in the United Kingdom than did the polio virus against which it was meant to inoculate. http://www.timesofisrael.com/protests-voiced-against-oral-polio-vaccina…

You can read about the effects of OPV in India, too, if it interests you. what gives forbes credibility for you?

the fluoride tangent:

The mineral fluorine is widespread throughout nature. … Sodium fluoride, on the other hand, is an industrial waste byproduct of aluminum and phosphate production, the manufacture of which grew considerably in the 1920s and 30s. At that time fluoride pollution of air from such factories damaged the crops, wildlife and livestock in surrounding areas. Lawsuits and health officials forced the companies to install pollution control devices to trap fluoride waste, which shifted the problem from airborne to solid poisons which had to be disposed of. The companies began to sell sodium fluoride as rat an insect poison; later on it was marketed as a product to prevent tooth decay. Holistic Midwifery, vol 1.

I wondered where this thread would go; it has not disappointed. I ran across some statistics a couple years ago that made me stop and reconsider this issue. In the first 30 years that autism was being diagnosed, it was found in 2-5 per 10,000 births. That number recently been revised (again) to 1 in every 87. While some of the increase may be due to more accurate screening and detection, current studies indicate this is a very small percentage. The spike also coincides with the expansion of childhood vaccinations. Prior to 1990, about 2/3 of autistic children were born that way while 1/3 regressed into autism sometime after age 1. Starting in the 1980s, the trend has reversed. Again, coinciding with the increase in vaccinations. My children were already immunized before I encountered this information and no one asks me for advice on this issue, so it’s really a moot point for me. But I would definitely be hesitant to jump in if I had it to do over. At the very least I would delay and spread any vaccinations that we did get for the kids.

It is just as likely that the increase in the diagnoses of various learning disabilities is caused by children’s brain being wired by television and a lack of physical activity when they are infants. Kids don’t get to crawl around on the floor anymore- they get put into car seats, bouncers, and walkers.

There are far too many lifestyle and environmental factors in play to attempt to ‘pin’ things like an increase in autism on immunizations.

I wonder if the amount of prescription drugs and vaccines we use today have anything to do with the epidemic of cancer we are now seeing.

[christian cerna]

I wonder if the amount of prescription drugs and vaccines we use today have anything to do with the epidemic of cancer we are now seeing.

Wonder away but consider this …

[Chip Van Emmerik]

I wondered where this thread would go; it has not disappointed. I ran across some statistics a couple years ago that made me stop and reconsider this issue. In the first 30 years that autism was being diagnosed, it was found in 2-5 per 10,000 births. That number recently been revised (again) to 1 in every 87. While some of the increase may be due to more accurate screening and detection, current studies indicate this is a very small percentage. The spike also coincides with the expansion of childhood vaccinations.

Seriously … this has been debunked

http://www.forbes.com/sites/emilywillingham/2013/08/09/court-rulings-do…

[QUOTE]… since 1970 OPV had caused more cases of paralysis in the United Kingdom than did the polio virus against which it was meant to inoculate.[/QUOTE] This statement is very interesting. If he is relating vaccination related paralysis cases post-1970 to polio related paralysis cases post-1970, the cause of the imbalance is very likely that polio has pretty much been eradicated by the vaccine. Thus, the assertion is not very useful.

But, he could also be saying that the incidence of vaccination related paralysis cases post-1970 is greater than the polio related paralysis cases pre-1970. If so, I doubt the credibility of his source.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-17045202

According to the BBC article, in 1961, there were 707 acute cases of polio in Great Britain, and 79 deaths. Does Dr. Halvorsen claim more than 707 cases of vaccination related paralysis or 79 cases of vaccination related death in Great Britain? If so, in what time period? It really looks to me like the polio vaccine has been a smash success.

I do not deny that vaccines have side effects. Rarely, they are severe. Rarely, they are fatal. I also don’t deny that some vaccines may have done more harm than good. However, looking at the large picture, vaccines have changed the world for the better.

With drugs, GMO foods, chemotherapy, pesticides, chlorinated water, and hormone injected beef, we are living longer, healthier lives.

[christian cerna]

Isn’t aspirin made from an ingredient found naturally in tree bark? Isn’t that considered a natural remedy?

Garlic itself has been proven to be one of the best anti viral foods on the planet.

Christian, feel free to eat garlic when you have a serious viral issue. But please don’t risk the lives of anyone else by trying to get them to eat garlic when they should be on drugs.

[christian cerna]

Garlic itself has been proven to be one of the best anti viral foods on the planet.

If you are single it could explain it :)

[JD Miller]

Vickie’s question raises a valid point. We too were bothered by vaccines that came from aborted babies, but then we found out that they are not continuing to harvest fetuses to make the vaccine, but that it simply came from one fetus a long time ago. It was terrible that a person had to be murdered in order for this vaccine to be developed and I would never want that to happen again, but now that we have the vaccine, I do not discourage others from using it. From what I understand, we put more human life at risk by buying shoes made oversees in sweat shops than we do by using vaccines developed from human fetuses.

In my mind, I don’t wish to knowingly attempt to benefit from an abortion, because even if it did happen a long time ago, the vaccine is still to this day derived from that cell line. It did happen a long time ago… yet, I don’t believe that there is a statute of limitations on desecrating someone’s grave.

At the same time, it isn’t a matter I feel strong enough to promote the issue from the pulpit or flaunt with a measure of superiority to those around us who choose Varicella vaccination. I think that is something that the poll attached to this thread recognizes- there are issues like this that can end up distracting from what should be the matters that comprise our primary identity. As many things as my family and I do that run counter our current culture, we have made an honest effort to insure that we distinguish between our personal choices and what God’s Word demands… and go to lengths to insure that people we serve are not left with the impression we are imposing our choices on them. I am talking about things like this issue, but also things like our schooling choices, the decision to foster/adopt, family planning choices… As established as we are in behavioral areas like these, there is no unilateral Scriptural command to clearly dictate streamlined behavior in these areas. It would be easy for people to draw the conclusion that our behavior in some of these areas is demanded in Scripture- an impression we don’t wish to leave (even though we do believe our behavior is based on Bibilcal reasoning…).

his book’s not on kindle, so I fished around some more online. And he has this interesting paper—he pretty much just works in vaccinating children, so he has relevant insights.

His polio statement is this:

I also offered the safer inactivated polio vaccine in place of the live oral polio vaccine that, I discovered, had caused more cases of polio paralysis over the previous 20 years than had the wild virus

it sounds like, in a 20-yr period, the live oral vaccine caused more paralysis than did regularly-caught polio in the same 20-yr period. how many kids caught the wild polio vs how many were given oral vax in that period? I would also like to know. But I also want to know that the oral vax is paralyzing kids, too, not just the wild form of the disease.

The paper is brief and interesting to read and covers a lot of issues: http://www.ecomed.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/2-halvorsen.pdf

He notes a case about the autism thing, apparently it’s not a closed-book idea to him yet:

However the medical authorities reassured parents that she was a unique case and that “normal” children were not at risk from developing autism from vaccines. This is because Hannah was found to have mitochondrial dysfunction, a “rare” disorder that predisposed her to the adverse vaccine reaction. Mitochondrial dysfunction was thought to be a rare disorder, but it has now been discovered that over one in 200 children are born with mitochondrial abnormalities. 9

his paper is dated 2011, and those court cases (“disproving” the link, or just saying the evidence isn’t strong enough) go back earlier in 2000. I’m reading one of the court cases now. Interesting to read an actual case.

About oral polio vaccine, it’s very … i don’t know how to describe it. Look what I find online:

This pro-vax article for parents says the risk of paralysis from the oral vax is one in a million.

this article says the same risk is one in 8.7 million.

but actual doctors in india are reporting much different stats that are being officially ignored. if you don’t click on the link, it’s over 47,000 cases of OPV-associated paralysis in a year.

I am probably going to believe that Bill Gates is more invested in population control than philanthropy. His pieces don’t match up to make it philanthropical. I think it’s important to think about as believers because he is targeting the disadvantaged, those we фre supposed to be protecting and helping.

anyway, this convo could go on forever. we each make our choices with the info we find and prayer.

[Jim]

[Chip Van Emmerik]

I wondered where this thread would go; it has not disappointed. I ran across some statistics a couple years ago that made me stop and reconsider this issue. In the first 30 years that autism was being diagnosed, it was found in 2-5 per 10,000 births. That number recently been revised (again) to 1 in every 87. While some of the increase may be due to more accurate screening and detection, current studies indicate this is a very small percentage. The spike also coincides with the expansion of childhood vaccinations.

Seriously … this has been debunked

http://www.forbes.com/sites/emilywillingham/2013/08/09/court-rulings-do…

1. Experts never agree among themselves; there are always expert voices on both sides of the discussions.

2. Experts constantly change their minds; they cannot be fully trusted.

[Chip Van Emmerik]

Two things I teach my history students about the age of the expert:

1. Experts never agree among themselves; there are always expert voices on both sides of the discussions.

2. Experts constantly change their minds; they cannot be fully trusted.

What you say is true. One must consider the field of knowledge. In the natural sciences, new fields, or hypotheses at the boundaries of an established field, are inevitably less secure than assertions that have decades of experimental confirmation behind them. And, for many reasons, the natural sciences are more secure in general than human or social sciences. Within all fields of knowledge, there needs to be room for people to speak against the consensus, to generate new questions and stimulate knowledge production through dialectical confrontation.

But even with these caveats in place, expert consensus is still better than any other method I can think of when it comes to policy decisions. When there isn’t a rock solid answer, what could be more prudent than accommodating what the most knowledgeable people advise, while continuing to research the issue?

My question would be, once you have taught your students not to trust experts, what then?

in questions like this, where there isn’t absolute truth, experts are like consultants. One listens to sides, searches, makes personal decisions.

A huge complicating factor concerning experts is money. Being in the birth field, for example, I know that most “medical” decisions are made based on the doctor’s malpractice insurance requirements or hospital protocols. It is not based on what is really healthy for that client.

And true experts tend to know where the uncertainties of a question are. But by the time it filters down, they’re stated as certainties, etc.

I could keep rambling about this, but baby fussing.

[Charlie]

[Chip Van Emmerik]

Two things I teach my history students about the age of the expert:

1. Experts never agree among themselves; there are always expert voices on both sides of the discussions.

2. Experts constantly change their minds; they cannot be fully trusted.

What you say is true. One must consider the field of knowledge. In the natural sciences, new fields, or hypotheses at the boundaries of an established field, are inevitably less secure than assertions that have decades of experimental confirmation behind them. And, for many reasons, the natural sciences are more secure in general than human or social sciences. Within all fields of knowledge, there needs to be room for people to speak against the consensus, to generate new questions and stimulate knowledge production through dialectical confrontation.

But even with these caveats in place, expert consensus is still better than any other method I can think of when it comes to policy decisions. When there isn’t a rock solid answer, what could be more prudent than accommodating what the most knowledgeable people advise, while continuing to research the issue?

My question would be, once you have taught your students not to trust experts, what then?