It just occurred to me that, even though there was news about it, I never mentioned what's happened recently with respect to California bill AB2109. As you might recall, I wrote about this bill about four weeks ago. In brief, this bill, if passed into law, would require that California parents seeking a "personal belief" exemption for vaccines to meet with a physician and have a physician sign off on what is more or less an informed consent form stating that the parents had been informed of the risks and benefits of vaccines and, more importantly for purposes of the personal belief exemption, the risks (many) and benefits (virtually none) of not vaccinating. Parents would still be able to refuse to vaccinate by claiming that vaccines are against their "personal beliefs" (whatever that means). They just wouldn't be able to do it by signing a form at school, no questions asked. In other words, the law would make it just a little more difficult to obtain a personal belief exemption, and that's a good thing, because right now in California it's easier to get a personal belief exemption than it is to actually have your children vaccinated. That means that it's not just antivaccine parents who use the personal belief exemption but parents who aren't antivaccine but are just too darned lazy or unconcerned to make sure their children are vaccinated.
It turns out that earlier this week, a hearing on AB2109 was held by the California Assembly Committee on Health. According to a local news report, the California Medical Association, the California Pharmacy Association, the Association of Physician Assistants, the California State Employees Association, the County Health Executive Association, as well as the doctors and dentists' unions all lined up to testify in support of the bill. In addition, Health care workers lined up to endorse the bill, including doctors, medical students, and nurses, as well they should. After all, primary care doctors, especially pediatricians, understand the value of vaccination more than anyone; that is, with one rather despicable exception. Yes, we're talking about Bob Sears:
"A free choice that is contingent upon finding another person to sign off on your free choice is not really a free choice at all," said Dr. Bob Sears, a pediatrician.
Sears is against the law. He joined protestors on the Capitol steps Tuesday, to argue against the rule change.
On Facebook, Dr. Sears was a bit less...restrained:
THE FIGHT ISN'T OVER. Ya, we lost this battle, but we expected that and were praying for Divine intervention. We can't give up. The more legislators we can keep against this bill, the less likely it will be to eventually make it off the Governor's desk with a signature. So, every call matters!!! Start calling your Assembly person. Here is one thought on the meeting:
You saw the long parade of doctors all "conveniently" saying they would sign their patients' exemption waiver. You know what this means? IT MEANS WE ARE BEING EFFECTIVE. WE'VE CALLED THE DEMOCRATS OUT ON ONE OF THE BIGGEST PROBLEMS WITH THE BILL. If this wasn't a major problem, then the democrats wouldn't have needed to bother with getting all those doctors up there and obviously and blantantly coaching them, each and every one of them, to say exactly the same thing. You'd think they'd at least try to make it not so obvious. This tells me that they are worried about this issue because they KNOW it's an issue. This makes it obvious that it's NOT a done deal. They know they might not win in the end, so they are fighting. That's a good sign. Hats off to Dawn Winkler and everyone else for all the hard work. Keep it up!!!
Dr. Bob sounds a bit unhinged here, don't you think? I mean, seriously. He's using all caps and everything and combining it with paranoia. Does he have any evidence that legislators supporting the bill coached any of the physicians who testified in favor of the bill. Or that they somehow did anything questionable at all.
I also notice that Bob Sears is actually paying tribute to Dawn Winkler, thanking her for her efforts to combat the bill. Some of you might know who Dawn Winkler is, but for those of you who don't I'll refer you to a couple of posts I wrote about her nearly six years ago when I referred to her as an "antivaccine activist running for governor of the state of Colorado." And that's what she was at the time, too, a die-hard antivaccinationist spouting the most ridiculous pseudoscience and misinformation about vaccines. In fact, I have to wonder whether Winkler's rubbing off on Sears. She's pretty unhinged when she rants about vaccines. Now, "Dr. Bob" is starting to sound a little unhinged himself about vaccines. Maybe it was just the disappointment of having been trounced so nicely. Let's see how he sounds compared to Dawn Winkler's testimony:
Winkler, the California State co-director of the National Vaccine Information Center, and executive director of Health Advocacy in the Public Interest, said the bill was not about parents receiving more accurate information about vaccinations. "They already have that available," Winkler said. "This is about parents' rights, under the law. Why on earth should parents have to obtain more information about vaccinations and opt-out permission? This will interfere with the right to free education and the right to religious freedom. This bill poses a threat to freedom."
So that explains what's happened to Winkler in the six years since I last recall mentioning her. How appropriate. She's with the antivaccine group the NVIC now, which makes perfect sense. I just didn't know she had moved to California. In any case, Winkler can't argue the science, as much as she thinks she can; so instead she retreats to overwrought "health freedom"-style arguments, particularly "parents' rights" arguments. Here's the problem: Parents' rights are not absolute by any stretch of the imagination, nor should they be. Parents, for instance, are not allowed to deny their children life-saving medical care for a life-threatening disease. Remember Madeline Neumann? She was an 11-year-old whose parents relied on prayer instead of insulin to treat diabetic ketoacidosis. Madeline died, and her parents were prosecuted for second degree reckless homicide. Another child named Ava Worthington died when she developed bronchial pneumonia and her parents, belonging to a religion that eschews medical care, did not seek treatment. No, my point is not to advocate prosecuting antivaccine parents for neglect or abuse. Rather, it's to point out that there is another being in the equation besides them. The child has interests that deserve protection. If anything AB2109 doesn't go far enough in protecting those interests, but it's better than the law as it stands now. Finally, "health freedom" means nothing more than the freedom of quacks from pesky government laws and regulations against their quackery, and "parental choice" means refusing vaccines based on pseudoscience.
Unfortunately, in this country, there is a widespread apparent belief that parents' rights are the only rights that matter. As a consequence, in this country, we tend to grant parents wide latitude in making health care choices for their children. While in most cases this is appropriate, unfortunately, the law sometimes seems to bend over backwards to protect parents' rights.
Particularly amusing (or it would be amusing if it weren't so racist) is this objection to AB2109:
The unspeakable issue at the root of Pan's bill is the influx of children from other countries into California's public schools, who bring with them new strains of measles, mumps, chicken pox and flu bugs, among other communicable diseases. Children who have recently traveled out of the country also bring home infectious diseases.
It is not politically correct to address that problem. Instead the Legislature is proposing that everyone get vaccinated.
It's no different that a teacher punishing the entire class because of one bad kid. The inability to single out the issue is the problem.
TRANSLATION: "It's the wetbacks spreading disease, not our good, clean American children. Instead of restricting the Health Freedom of Real Americans, we should do something about them wetbacks, don'tcha think?"
No, I don't think that's a straw man, either, and, yes, as I said, it's racist. Not only is this objection racist, but it's almost certainly wrong. Most of the schools with the highest personal exemption rates are not in areas where there are a lot of illegal immigrants. Oh, no. They're in Marin County and places where there are lots of upper middle class white people who've imbibed the antivaccine nonsense on the University of Google and developed the arrogance of ignorance that lead them to believe that they know more about vaccines experts who have spent their entire professional career studying vaccines.
There's one final issue with this bill. I couldn't find it mentioned in any of the news reports anywhere and the text of the bill doesn't reflect this change, at least not yet, but apparently an amendment was added to the bill before it got out of committee that would allow naturopaths to counsel parents on the risks and benefits of vaccines and sign the exemption form under the supervision of a licensed physician. If this is true, it's a disaster for the bill that will provide a loophole the size of an aircraft carrier for antivaccine parents. It's something that really needs to be stripped from the bill before it's voted on; failure to do so will render the bill much less effective, perhaps even nearly useless.
This brings up another issue, that of licensing naturopaths and giving them prescribing privileges (which naturopaths have in a limited form in California). Naturopaths have been waging a largely successful campaign to expand the number of states that license them and allow them prescribing privileges. They've been all too successful in rebranding themselves as a real alternative to physicians as primary care doctors. Because they have the imprimatur of the state through their licensure, they've achieved a level of respectability that is completely undeserved based on the rank pseudoscience and quackery they practice. Legislators do not realize this and hence most of them probably don't know that naturopaths practice quackery. It probably seemed a perfectly reasonable compromise to the committee, given that one of the major objections of antivaccinationists to the bill is that, in its original form, it didn't allow alternative medicine practitioners to sign the exemption form. Assuming the reports I've received are true and the Assembly did amend the bill to allow naturopaths to sign the exemption forms, it points to just how far reaching and corrosive to science-based medicine licensing naturopaths is.
In the short term, what needs to happen is that proponents of science-based medicine need to work to persuade the Assembly to strip the amendment from the bill that allows naturopaths to counsel patients on vaccine risks and benefits. It has been shown before that there is an association between seeing naturopaths and not receiving all recommended vaccines; there's also an association between naturopathic care and catching a vaccine-preventable disease. So getting naturopaths off the list of health care professionals who can counsel parents about vaccines should be a no-brainer. Next, in the long term, the next effort must be to oppose licensure of naturopaths and to go beyond that, to roll back licensure of naturopaths in every state in which they are licensed. Such licensure serves no purpose other than to enrich quacks, and, based on the example of AB2109, it has far-reaching corrosive effects on medical policy. It needs to end.
- Log in to post comments
Like the children of missionaries, for example?
How uncomprehending do you have to be to fail to realize pointing out that an influx of immigrant children and numbers of resident children who have traveled abroad increases the overall risk of infection argues strongly in support of immunization, rather than against it?
Good point, JGC. And how crazy do you have to be to see the parade of doctors willing to sign off on exemptions as a sign of a conspiracy *against* your desire not to vaccinate? "Oooh, there are doctors who, like me, will support their patients' decision not to vaccinate. IT'S A CONSPIRACY PLANTED BY EVIL DEMS!!!!!!"
JCG and Calli: Your arguments have one flaw. You are using logic instead of thinking like anti-vaxers.
Problem: Immigrant children expose our population to new strains of infectious diseases.
Solution: I like turtles. My uncle was once made into a hat.
(that more like it?)
That's one thing that really got to me with a lot of autism curebies using Lupron, chelation, and all the other nasty stuff: Whenever I got into an argument with them, their position certainly seemed, "My children, my property, so I can do whatever I want with them and you can't stop me."
@ Bronze Dog:
I wonder if that attitude is connected to the perception that their "real child" has been "taken away" by the vaccines. If you believe that you're dealing with an empty shell instead of an actual human being, it seems to me like that makes it a lot easier to disregard them having any rights worth considering.
That level of dehumanization is positively revolting in organizations claiming to be about autism advocacy.
Before you go calling Naturopathic Doctors quacks, you might like to know that traditional doctors ( highly respected specialists of several types) nearly killed my daughter with their inaccurate diagnosis and treatments. It was only out of desperation that I took her to an ND who in turn saved her life and gave her back her complete health and peace of mind. She had VCD caused by severe acid reflux. She was suffocating and terrified at the age of 10. It was a nightmare that continued to escalate with each doctor we saw until the ND treated her properly and appropriately with the correct methodology and diet change. She is a vibrant and successful young woman now with no health problems thanks to our brilliant ND. I urge you to be careful about discrediting NDs and their licensure. You may very well be taking away a person's only hope in their quest for health.
That makes a disturbing amount of sense.
Like the intentionally unvaccinated child who brought Measles to San Diego in 2008?
I'm sorry that medicine is not an exact science and your daughter suffered as a result of mis-diagnosis. While the ND may get some deserved credit for promoting a diet change, your daughter's health is due less to the 'brilliant' ND and more to her genetics and a healthy diet.
What "correct methodology" did your brilliant ND use to cure your daughter? And how do you back up your statement that real doctors "almost killed her"?
Vaccine science is junk science. Notice the lack of vaccine information and vaccine risks not being discussed here. Plenty of race-baiting, and Party worship/demonization.
My wife & I (both nurses for more than 20 years)have researched this vaccine information at length and to force us to try to find a doctor, within our Insurance limited-choices, that will agree that we have a right to make an "informed consent" is both an insult and unreasonable.
Some main points to consider; 1) Big Pharma operates by placing profits BEFORE safety (research Bayer factor 8 and how they knowingly gave HIV tainted drugs to hemophiliacs causing death and permanent damage to many of these patients. 2)Much in the same way that digestion starts with chewing, the immune response is triggered at the NATURAL body entry points (nose/mouth & less often other openeings). To ARTIFICIALLY introduce hostile/dangerous/cancer-causing organisms AROUND these points (injection) bypasses the immune system's proper triggering.
There is way more information available at NVIC dot org and elsewhere. Question: If vaccines truly protect us, why are unvaccinated people a danger to us "protected" folks?
Lastly, Informed Consent is one of the few reamining American values left that keep us from being in the same class as the Nazi's.
What timing! I checked in at exactly the right time to see the first Godwin of the thread! No doubt Holocaust analogies will soon follow.
Isn't today *the day* - you-know-who's you know what? Which is kinda like N-zi Bastille Day or suchlike.
In other news:
there is gnashing of teeth and rending of garments @ AoA because a billboard says that 1 in 88 are BORN with autism!
You invoked Godwin's law, you automatically lose your argument.
Considering the unhinged tone of your little rant, it wasn't much of a winner in the first place.
You would think that someone who has been a nurse for 20 years would know that vaccinations are not 100% effective. So I'm guessing that JW Salthouse is either not really a nurse, or is a nurse - just a very bad one. I'm also wondering why a nurse wouldn't also realize that people with compromised immune systems i.e. chemo patients, AIDS patients, organ donor recipients; are also vulnerable.
THE FIGHT ISN'T OVER. Ya, we lost this battle, but we expected that and were praying for Divine intervention.
Yes, because God likes dead kids.
Nice USE OF CAPS. NOT TOO MUCH but with just the right dramatic flair.
Your comprehension of science is abysmal. A nurse graduating today gets a far better grounding in biology and biochemistry than you obviously got. And Nazis. Or something.
I agree that Dr. Bob sounds increasingly unhinged; it's evident in this rant as well: http://tacanowblog.com/2012/04/10/so-autism-is-common-who-cares/ The arguments against this bill were so weak, melodramatic and inaccurate that opponents should be grateful for the time they did have to argue against it.
JW Salthouse, I can only hope that you and your wife are never any where near me and my family for medical care. Your education has failed you miserably.
If you support informed consent, you ought to be supportive of a bill (CA AB2109) that requires it.
JW Salthouse has polluted the internet with his lunatic rantings about New World Order, Skull & Bones nonsense, climate change conspiracy, Alex Jones and all the same old same old.
He calls himself a "health care professional", "investigative journalist" and "citizen activist" on his online profile.
Today he proved he knows absolutely nothing about science.
It did follow the classic pattern though.
1. Appeal to authority.
2. Poisoning the well.
3. Big Pharma conspiracy.
4. A variant of the "Natural" argument.
5. Teh Toxins.
6. Illogical rhetorical question.
7. And capping it off with A violation of Godwin's law.
Do they use some kind of software to write this stuff? Just check various boxes and presto...one crank posting coming up!
Don't forget there are some new corollaries of Godwin's law out. They include sheep, sheeple, lemmings, and Kool-aide.
"Winkler, the California State co-director of the National Vaccine Information Center, and executive director of Health Advocacy in the Public Interest, said the bill was not about parents receiving more accurate information about vaccinations. "They already have that available," Winkler said."
I also give out medication monographs with every prescription but that doesn't mean my patients actually read them. If there is something important that I think they need to know I will give personal counseling. There is perhaps too much information available to patients these days and is very difficult to pick through. I can appreciate the doctors in California being able to give accurate information to a person in a last effort to counter what their neighbor, friend, absurd website, etc told them. Even if a few more parents take the blinders off after this conversation that would be a small step in the right direction for California
If you are the caregiver of a child, whether on account of being the child's biological parent, legal guardian, etc, you have a responsibility to look out for the child's best interests. If your beliefs, desires, whims, and such run contra to your child's best interests, then IMO it is your responsibility to put them aside when making decisions on behalf of your child.
All of this 'health freedom' rhetoric is, on my view, dangerously close to allowing parents & other caregivers to violate their children's rights.
More anti-vaccine propaganda, courtesy of Natural News today:
PF Louis reports that vaccines cause polio-like illness in India. The Gates are demonised as usual.
Mike Adams interviews ( printed) Russell Blaylock about vaccines- it's all there: conspiracy, Godwins and a new one for me - vaccines cause autism and schizophrenia!
If you read material like this or the collection of antivax articles @ PRN, you'll see how trolls get "educated".
A small incestuous group with a limited set of mis-informing topics passed around ceaselessly to an enraptured and enthusiastic audience.
I'm almost hoping the "high fructose corn syrup" and autism pseudo-linkage takes off, only because in this part of the country we welcome any excuse to despise Archer Daniels Midland.
As I said in another thread, a lot of people complaining about "politically correct" turn out to be jerks annoyed that they cannot say something offending (generally racist and/or sexist) and being called for it.
I rest my case.
Yeah, it's sort of puzzling. Let's forget an instant Winkler's mention of all of these disease-ridden immigrants; is she also advocating against good Americans travelling abroad to these filthy countries, and/or for quarantining them as they come back home? Without even giving them the choice to immunize themselves before travelling?
For someone so fierce about freedom issues, that's some serious freedom-stomping, here.
From what I've read, the loonies believe either
A) traces of mercury have been found in HFCS, and once again it's mercury that causes autism,
B) that consumption of HFCS reduces the zinc in the body, allowing autism to take hold.
Here a link to the "study' that started it all:
"...the immune response is triggered at the NATURAL body entry points (nose/mouth & less often other openeings). To ARTIFICIALLY introduce hostile/dangerous/cancer-causing organisms AROUND these points (injection) bypasses the immune system's proper triggering."
By this statement, I conclude that JB believes that oral and nasal mist vaccines do not bypass the immune system's proper triggering and bites, scrapes, cuts, punctures, and other similar woulds that break or penetrate the skin also bypass the immune system's proper triggering.
Dr. Jay Gordon on his website, refers us to his opinions about the pending legislation, and his recent radio debate with Assemblyman Richard Pan M.D. (Sponsor of California AB 2109)
(The things I do for science and for Respectful Insolence) Dr. Jay *claims* to be all for counseling. He also *claims* that government intrusion/interference is unnecessary and will lead to...
-Increased risk of kids and their non-vaccinating parents being ejected from a pediatrics practice.
-Increased mistrust of pediatricians...leading to a decrease in overall communication and, a decrease in the quality of overall health care for children.
Dr. Jay also says he consulted an attorney and in Jay's opinion, the form that the doctor signs that states (s)he has provided accurate information about immunizations, will lead to increased lawsuits against doctors, if an unimmunized child is infected with a vaccine-preventable disease.
Whoops, I meant JW not JB.
I read from that rant that Dr. Sears is saying that there was perjury, willing and negligent, going on at those hearings. I wonder if he could back it up with proof. Not that he needs any real proof of anything for his followers to believe him, in my opinion. Maybe we could contact one or two of those people who testified for the bill and ask them if they were coached?
Heck, I'm free for the evening.
Since today is a special Friday... I hope that RI readers will grant me the indulgence of one last piece of (semi-related) anti-vax nonsense before I close up shop. I thank you in advance....
@ Thinking Moms' Revolution today:
Poppy writes about cannabis for ASD.
Doesn't *that* ring a bell! A UK-based effort is mentioned.
Residents of California who read RI: You have work to do. The bill will next be heard by the Appropriations Committee. As of this writing, the bill hasn't been scheduled for hearing.
You need to write letters to the committee members, make calls to their offices, and otherwise loudly express your support for this bill.
The vaccine rejectionists were able to muster hundreds of letters in opposition to the Health Committee. One group of chiropractic students faxed over 300 letters in opposition!.
I've set up a website to make it all easy for you. Go to http://californianssupportingab2109.blogspot.com/. There you will find background materials, pre-addressed draft letters to members of the Appropriations Committee, and other suggested messages.
The best thing to do, according to my sources, is to fax letters of support to all the committee members. Second best is to call the committee members' offices. Third is to use the committee members' contact forms.
There will be resources for all of the above by the end of today.
I am happy to report that my kids' pediatrician is cracking down on families who won't vaccinate or follow the recommended schedule...I don't know how prevalent these sorts of policies are, but they can only be a good thing.
The rest of that "CalWatchDog" piece is a real treat.
Obviously, it is the trauma of vaccination that destroys the natural superman-like impenetrable barrier of the skin and renders it susceptible to bites, scrapes, cuts, punctures, pimples, rashes, and the like.
Citations desparately needed here: please describe in detail the steps which occur when the immune system is "properly triggered", and how that differs from the steps that occur when "improperly triggered" by vaccination--are different molecules involved? Different cell types?
Because they serve as potential vectors of infection and compromise herd immunity (surely you're familiar with the term, having been nurses for 20 years and having done all that research?)
In addition to JGC's points, please contrast with the immune response when organisms are introduced via a skinned knee, puncture by a thorn, or cut from falling on a rock.
"Vaccine science is junk science. Notice the lack of vaccine information and vaccine risks not being discussed here. Plenty of race-baiting, and Party worship/demonization.
My wife & I (both nurses for more than 20 years)have researched this vaccine information at length and to force us to try to find a doctor, within our Insurance limited-choices, that will agree that we have a right to make an "informed consent" is both an insult and unreasonable."
JW Salthouse is not a Registered Nurse...he is a Licensed Vocational Nurse:
Joseph William Salthouse LVN, is married to Carol Salthouse who is a Registered Nurse. She has had a number of charges brought against for professional misconduct and impairment for street drugs. She has spent time in jail for domestic violence and use of methaphetamines:
Sorry JW...I need to defend Registered Nurses and I find your comments truly offensive.
lilady @31 :Â
I figured all along that was the objection. Â As things stand now, an antivax doctor can just not discuss vaccines. Â The parent brings the child to him, knowing he's antivax, and the topic just doesn't come up. Â If the child gets a vaccine-preventable disease, well, tough luck. Â It was the parents' responsibility to decide.
But under this law, the antivax doctor has to make a choice.
He can truthfully explain the risks and benefits of vaccinating versus the risks and benefits of leaving the child unvaccinated and hoping for herd immunity or a mild case if the child gets a vaccine-preventable disease; in this case he can sign the declaration truthfully, but the parent could easily be offended by the truth (or appalled to learn the truth at last and resolve to see a better doctor) and leave his practice.
On the other hand, the antivax doctor can parrot all the misinformation found on the Internet or in the books of other antivax doctors, and sign the declaration claiming he presented the risks and benefits. Â That will keep the parent happy and the child unvaccinated, but if the child gets a vaccine-preventable disease, the parent is going to suddenly remember all that misinformation that the antivax doctor spewed and he's going to be looking at a malpractice suit. Â The authorities might be interested in that too.
For that matter, an antivax doctor might need to worry about stings -- maybe that new parent who just came in wanting to keep the child unvaccinated knows what the risks and benefits are and Â intends to report what misinformation the antivaxxer is passing out under the guise of medical practice.
@ LW: I don't think Dr. Jay would be worried about stings...because his own website is so blatantly urging parents to use their own judgment (mommy/daddy intuition trumps the recommendations from the CDC and the American Academy of Pediatrics.)
A member of Dr. Jay's staff (Cheryl Taylor), who is not a doctor, not a nurse, not a Physician Assistant...but who *manages* his website...is dispensing medical advice about vaccines:
Here's Dr. Jay's *advice* about Prevnar vaccine (February 23, 2010)
"The Prevnar vaccine is too new for me to recommend. The number of cases of Pneumococcal ear infections which could be prevented is very small and the number of cases of meningitis prevented is also small. I have no quarrel with doctors who recommend the shot or with parents who choose to get it. I have very strong objections to advertising this immunization to the general public on television. I donât think enough information can be disseminated in 60 seconds."
(Prevnar 7 valent was recommended by the AAP, ten years before...June, 2000)
I'd like to ask Dr. Jay what credentials Cheryl has to recommend that it is "a wise decision to initially delay vaccines on a 5 mo. old preemie", that said preemie "has a very immature nervous system that could not react well to an assault to that system" (though I think she meant immune system), and that "Waiting until a year is an easy to support decision"?
Is she a nurse? An immunologist? A neurobiologist? Heck, an epidemiologist? (I'll even take a medical assistant.)
I do wonder what kind of flack I myself would catch (in the form of a rather lengthy and hilarious email from one "JC" [not of Nazareth] to the health department in which he confuses libel with slander and vice-versa and is utterly clueless of the meaning of the verb "stalking") if I were to answer a question in a similar manner, only, you know, saying that delaying vaccines on a preemie only puts that preemie at a higher risk for things that kill preemies.
But that's just me. You don't have to answer, Dr. Jay (if you still lurk these here internetz).
@ Ren: Cheryl's got plenty of *credentials*...she's Dr. Jay's in-house "lactation specialist"!
Where is the pediatrician to the stars(?)...he's always quick to come here, to offer up a defense about allowing mommies (and daddies) to decide when, and if, their children will be immunized.
Well, we know that the little editor has been lurking here:
Ren, don't preemies get the very expensive RSV vaccine? I talked to a woman who told me her premature twins received this vaccine because it was something that was dangerous to preemies, but it was expensive (fortunately she had insurance).
She also said it was very important for her twins to be current on vaccinations, and that they were not delayed by much, except by length of initial hospital stay (my sister spent three months in the hospital after being born two months early almost fifty years ago).
Ren, I have a minor request. I read a comment somewhere that Mexico has very good immunization regulations, and someone here recently posted that their rates are better than the USA. As you can see above with Ms. Winkler's rant that she is implying folks crossing the border from the south are bringing in disease:
Somehow the kid who started a measles outbreak in San Diego after visiting Europe does not count.
Could you provide link to the relevant Mexican government pages on immunization, please? I tried looking, but I mostly get travel to Mexico advice. I did find the levels of immunization (which are better than the USA), but not the regulations. Thank you in advance.
@ Chris: These are not the Mexican regulations about childhood immunizations, but rather a comparison between the schedules in place in Mexico-vs-California:
Liz, your living in a dreamworld. There is no evidence to support your fantasy that:
Does Sid work for The Onion? Real people are not that stupid are they? Are they????
"Does Sid work for The Onion?
-No, The Onion writers are clever and Offal isn't.
"Real people are not that stupid are they? Are they????"
-Yes, to both of your questions.
Offal seems fixated on the 2008 San Diego Measles and questioned my usage of the term "index case" to describe Dr. Sears' patient. (He seemed to confuse "index case" which is the proper terminology for the case that starts an outbreak of a disease such as measles in a non-endemic measles area, with the phrase "zero case" which is the proper terminology for a newly identified communicable disease i.e., AIDS).
Offal has not read the complete Ho-Po article and how I and other posters got Dr. Sears to admit that the "index case" was a deliberately unimmunized child, who was, in fact Dr. Sears' patient. Nor has Offal read the completed investigation of the San Diego measles outbreak:
Offal is still supporting his own fantasy (and is in total denial), about the measles outbreak caused by one of Dr. Sears' patients...and the patients' two siblings.
Offal needs to "get some help."
Kelly, speaking of stupid, on today's measles thread you said it kills 800,000 each year today. Here's what the CDC says:
Worldwide, there are estimated to be 20 million cases and 164,000 deaths each year. More than half of the deaths occur in India. For more information on measles in the United States and worldwide, visit the Global Elimination page.
Who's stupid now?
Baglady , if you just hit random keys on your computer the results would make more sense than what you usually post. Besides what are you doing up 3:30 am. I am starting to worry about you.
OK Sid, my citation says 800,000 yours 164,000. 164,000 does not bother you? None of these people have to die, but you seems to want 164,000 of them to. Stupid is not in the range of numbers, it is the deliberate contempt for the victims that you harbor.
My number was from 2000, yours from 2008. Gee, think of how many million people have died in those twelve years from 2000 to 2012. Hell if we include 1999 we have another 873,000. All of which are preventable. Who is stupid? You!
@Kelly- These are the facts:
Accordind to WHO:
7.6 million children under the age of five die every year, according to 2010 figures.
Over two-thirds of these early child deaths are due to conditions that could be prevented or treated with access to simple, affordable interventions.
Leading causes of death in under-five children are pneumonia, diarrhoea, malaria and health problems during the first month of life.
Over one third of all child deaths are linked to malnutrition.
Children in low-income countries are nearly 18 times more likely to die before the age of five than children in high-income countries.
Just (trying to) keep you honest Offal. Thanks for your concern about my well-being...and for the opportunity to post about your inanities.
How's your radio career coming along...any offers...since you made a fool of yourself on British radio while talking about chicken pox parties, sending chicken pox lollipops through the mail and debating a real physician/college professor about immunology?
Let us know when you publish again on AoA...we always welcome the opportunity to point fingers at you and laugh.
The Rotavirus vaccine has saved many children. I wonder how many more could be saved with better vaccine coverage?
Thanks anon for the link to the WHO measles factsheet(s)
Did you see this one?
Measles mortality reduction: a successful initiative
Measles deaths worldwide fell by 78% between 2000 and 2008, from an estimated 733 000 in 2000 to 164 000 in 2008. In addition, all regions with the exception of one, have achieved the United Nations goal of reducing measles mortality by 90% from 2000 to 2010, two years ahead of target. Vaccinating nearly 700 million children against measles, through large-scale immunization campaigns and increased routine immunization coverage, has prevented an estimated 4.3 million measles deaths in less than a decade.
@ Kelly: Here you go from "anon's' link to WHO fact Sheets:
"Estimated rotavirus deaths for children under 5 years of age: 2008, 453 000"
The numbers of lives saved by the Measles and Rotavirus vaccines is amazing. In ten years millions of lives have been saved. The fact we have to fight to implement these life saving measures makes me wonder about our collective sanity.
@ Kelly: It is truly amazing. And, it totally knocks down any *lingering doubts* about public health immunization initiatives to protect our own kids...and kids everywhere..from deadly childhood diseases.
I can't imagine losing one of my precious children, the thought is too horrible. Think of all the joy that those saved children are bringing to their families and the world!
@Robert - so 164,000 deaths is okay by you, probably because they are Indian children & not American.....so, how does the math work for you here - 164,000 non-American deats = how many dead Americans for you to actually care?
I would love to see that number - but no like we'll ever see it from you.
Oh, and BTW - back to the other topic, please articulate with "untenable" positions you believe both the anti & pro-vaccine camps "clinge" to, since you were kind enough to admit that, in your mind, they exist on both sides.....
Are Th1 and Th2 levels supposed to be higher than normal or lower than normal for autistic people?
I'm stuck in the lab this morning with only the iPad to communicate with the world, but I'll try to find the Mexican health regulations on vaccines. I know they are stringent. I lived there until I was ten and then across the river in El Paso until I was 21. I visit every year and have plenty of friends and family there.
In other words, I'll find what you're requesting and post here, but give me some time.
Thank you, Ren. I can be patient, as I am trying to read 1493 this weekend. I just finished the chapter "Evil Air", which is about the devastation caused by mosquito vectored diseases like malaria and yellow fever.
By the way, I have been vaccinated for yellow fever twice in my life. In one of the countries I lived in there were some cases of yellow fever and we were then required to carry our immunization record with if we went into the interior.
He says seven minutes later, while fat-fingering his own name. That's a zinger, Sid, a zinger.
Ah, right, I now recall that Sid's in California. I shall thus revise the position to request the official Libertarian timetable of acceptable times to be awake.
Only a cruel and evil person would think that catching measles is okay dokay. Obviously this description fits Robert Schecter, real estate investor and spreader of anti-vaccine lies who pretends to be author and friend to Kurt Vonnegut, Sidney Offit (just another one of his lies).
baglady, you mean the interview in which I made mincemeat out of Dr. William Schaffner, President, National Foundation for Infectious Diseases? I heard he was actually in danger of losing his position after his poor performance debating me.
Narad, are you aware that there are different time zones in the USA?
Sorry, Narad. Didn't see your other comment
please articulate with "untenable" positions you believe both the anti & pro-vaccine camps "clinge" to, since you were kind enough to admit that, in your mind, they exist on both sides.....
Here's two from the so-called "antivax" camp"
Vaccines don't work
Incidence of certain VPDs were falling without vaccines. For example I agree vaccines caused the decline in measles incidence.
As to the pro-vaccine camp the cleanliness theory of polio was the topic of conversation.
Sid, I doubt you could make mincemeat of anyone's position. You've been caught out here repeatedly and done over. I'd like to see a link to a neutral assessment of your claim to have debated William Schaffner and embarrassed him so badly that he was nearly forced to quit.
@ Julian Frost: Offal did *debate* a real doctor. The debate took place on November 11, 2011 and was on the BBC-BBC Live Programmmes "Up All Night" broadcast.
A short time after that I posted a review/critique of Offal's *performance* on RI:
"Our resident "fire science expert" Sid Offal, has been bragging about his first radio interview...ever...on his Facebook Vaccine Machine website. He is all atwitter having scored a few lines in a newspaper commenting on the lollipop mailings and now his radio "debut".
A few of his Facebook pals actually listened to the broadcast and have complimented him. Offal, being the juvenile uneducated twit that he is, is lapping it up...probably thinking he's the ingenue celebrity. So I went "slumming" at BBC Radio, to listen to it. He made of fool of himself, couldn't make any cogent arguments and when he spoke about parents having the "right to refuse" immunizations, he evoked quite a response from a REAL expert who was also being interviewed (William Schaffner, M.D., Professor/Chairman-Department of Preventive Medicine, Vanderbilt University).
Offal, trying to impress Dr. Schaffner, then discussed his "hygiene hypothesis" theory. I don't think Dr. Schaffner was impressed.
The radio broadcast (11-11-2011) is available on the BBC I-Player at:
BBC-BBC Live Radio 5 Programmes-Up All Night
Offal's interview on this four hour program is at 1:16-1:25 into the "Up All Night" broadcast.
Posted by: lilady | November 12, 2011 3:49 AM"
About Dr. Schaffner....
Does this bill include a standard of information that approved healthcare professionals must disseminate to their patients?
Chris (and anyone interested),
Here is the Google-translated Mexican norm (the equivalent to a regulation in the US) on immunization:
@Science Mom: I've looked at the law and I don't see any such provision. Presently, California has this regulation to provide Vaccine Information Sheets to each parent or guardian whose child is getting an immunization:
This regulation is in compliance with federal regulations:
I have often stated here at RI, that I believe it to be good practice to have a folder with the current VIS sheets provided to pregnant women during the latter stage of their pregnancies...or to provide a folder containing the Vaccine Information Sheets to the mother, while still in the hospital, for her to read, prior to taking an infant to the doctor for the first well-baby visit. (This would, IMO, not change Federal and State laws to provide the specific VIS at the time of each immunization.)
Most certainly, when California AB 2109 is enacted, the AAP would be providing an outline of the specific topics to be discussed with parents.
BTW, federal and State laws presently state that the person who gives the immunization, must indicate that the VIS was provided at the time of the immunization, on the child's immunization record.
Liz Ditz @ 35
Thank you, Ren!
Although Bob Sears sounds like a nut in the other things you quote, there's nothing wrong with this particular statement.
So, Juice, when you move and get a new driver's license, having the Department of Motor Vehicles sign off that you passed the written and driving test is also against your free choice to drive? Or having certain legal and/or banking documents signed by a notary public is also not a free choice?
Sorry, but the whine about having to a signature that one received real information to for an informed choice is just silly.
In my view it's entirely equivalent to laws that require women who want abortions to discuss fetal development with a doctor.
Seriously? You have no right to any philosophical or religious exemption to school immunization requirements in the first place. This is a bit different from having a right to control one's own body, as there is an exchange involved.
Most definitely. You don't have the free choice to drive on public roads. You don't have the free choice to attend public school. You don't have the free choice of whether pay for either of them.
You do have the free choice of whether or not to do business with a particular bank based on their policies.
It's equivalent in the sense that it's a requirement being placed on the person not for a valid medical reason or even necessarily a valid educational reason. It's required in order to raise the perceived cost of selecting the "wrong" choice and, hopefully, to shame you into choosing the "right" one.
I grant you that it does not involve what the courts have decided is a right; my use of "entirely" was excessive.
P.S. Lest I be flamed for opinions I don't hold, in my view it's perfectly reasonable to require immunizations (which ones, of course, can be subject to discussion) and wrong for governments to attempt to circumvent Roe v. Wade by requiring medical procedures and consults that don't have a medical purpose.
Exactly. Attending public school is a privilege, not a right. Like driving on public roads.
And if you send your children to school, you have a reasonable expectation that they not get infected with a vaccine preventable disease (and sometimes the vaccines don't work). Just like you have a reasonable expectation to not get food poisoning at a restaurant.
Any resident of my or any other jurisdiction has the right to drive on a public road and send their children to a public school. Where do you live, Juice?
@ Juice, I agree with Narad. The existence of philosophical and religious exemptions are arbitrary; two states don't even have them and if you want to go by the law of the land for right or wrong, non-medical vaccine exemptions are a privilege and not a right. So Dr. Bob is (incorrectly) assuming that attending school without being vaccinated is a right and it isn't.
Just when you begin to believe that a woman's right to chose, cannot be subverted any more by right-to-life groups...and by inaccurate medical information...
"New Hampshire, for instance, seems to have developed a thing for linking sex and malignant disease. This week, the State House passed a bill that required that women who want to terminate a pregnancy be informed that abortions were linked to âan increased risk of breast cancer.â
As Terie Norelli, the minority leader, put it, the Legislature is attempting to make it a felony for a doctor âto not give a patient inaccurate information.â
And thereâs more. One of the sponsors, Representative Jeanine Notter, recently asked a colleague whether he would be interested, âas a man,â to know that there was a study âthat links the pill to prostate cancer.â
It's an exercise of the plenary police power of the state in the realm of public health. Here rests the "validity." I would take the possible instantiations, such as a mechanism of "shaming," to be something separate.
Agreed. I would have no problem with saying there's no religious exemption, or there's a religious exemption and it must be signed off on by a priest (with an attestation that you are a member of his/her/its congregation). I find it iffy that you must get your religious exemption signed off by a doctor. I think the purpose is to cause people to pay for an office visit and take time off from work, thus to make it inconvenient and expensive to opt out.
Since the Catholic Church is pro-vaccine (despite the lunatic ramblings of some of their members), I'm not sure you're going to find a priest who'll sign off on a religious exemption.
MO'B, you don't get a religious exemption signed off by a physician; they can only sign off on medical exemptions. Getting a religious exemption signed by a priest, minister or what have you is an empty gesture. For example, my (atheist) husband is an ordained minister, acquired from an internet church. If he should suddenly go daft on me, he could legally sign religious exemptions. There are more stringent hoops one should have to jump through to get one, especially in light of the fact that no religion has a policy against vaccines.
Thanks lilady, I couldn't find anything either. If that is not something stipulated in the final bill, then (either way actually) leaves these "vaccine friendly" practitioners in a rather tenuous position as someone stated earlier. Someone with legal expertise would be better suited to comment although I will anyhow; I see some possibilities that may open this particular group of practitioners to a spot of trouble: A.) They advise their clients of the medical consensus regarding risks/benefits of vaccines and diseases, B.) They pretend to advise their clients of the medical consensus regarding risks/benefits of vaccines and diseases giving them a wink wink nudge nudge (we open-minded ones know better now don't we), or C.) Lie and feed them the altie party-line.
Or in reality it being California, everyone goes on their merry way.
Now wait a second. This would be completely out of bounds in U.S. law, as it would in effect imply that the state is issuing stamps of approval to religious bodies. This is how the original New York statute got tossed in Sherr (672 F. Supp. 81).
No wonder why Dr. Sears is fighting this bill and, no wonder why Dr. Jay stated in a recent radio interview, that he had consulted an attorney about AB 2109. If I had the crap that they each have on their websites about vaccines, I'd be worried too.
@Juice: If you "opt out" of immunizations for your child by claiming a "Personal Belief Exemption" in California...or any other State, your child will not be permitted to attend daycare or school...in the event of an outbreak of a vaccine-preventable disease. Your child may be out of daycare or school for an extended period of time. It's so nice to hear that you would be willing to pit your pseudo-scientific belief system and your *right* of free choice against society's need to maintain herd immunity in your community...and the needs of a child who has a medical condition, that is a contraindication for certain vaccines.
I am kind of confused. California doesn't offer a religious or philosophical exemption; it's medical or a "personal belief exemption", period.
As we have seen in other states, vaccine-rejectionist parents do some funky things with religious exemptions.
Liz, all states have medical exemptions, 48 states have religious exemptions (although many are worded as philosophical or "personal belief") and I believe 21 states have philosophical exemptions in addition to the religious exemptions. California may be an exception by having a "personal belief exemption" cover both religious and philosophical. http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research/health/school-immunization-exemptio…
Looks like New Mexico and Maine have broad exemptions like California.
You know what this bill has nothing to do with vaccines. It is about our freedom to make our own decisions on what we choose to inject in our body or our children's body. This is directed to the author of the aforementioned article. You sheep always want to make us people that are self thinkers look out to be some kind of freaks or antivaccines activest. I am a typical father with a typical family. I just don't believe everthing I am told by Doctors, Pharmaceutical Companies, the Goverment. why don't you do your research, the Pharmaceutical companies have information out there that states severe side effects about their products. Doctors will not deviate from the current vaccine schedule which I have dealt with first hand. Some how they are going to put there personal signature ( B.S. !!! ) and say you don't have to vaccinate. There is only three doctors that will deviate from the current schedule in the entire sacramento area, THREE !!! At the end of the day what else will they force us to inject into our bodies. Our freedoms are slowly being taken away. Why isn't
everyone together on the sole premise of Freedom of choice!!!! We fight and oppose AB2109
for everyone! Even you....
Hey, Atellez. Why are you against informed consent and education?
Ateliez: You are, thank God, not a typical father. Real fathers want their children to be safe from potentially deadly childhood diseases.
You are shocked that only three doctors will deviate from the current vaccine schedule --- doesn't that tell you something? It means that there are a bunch of smart, conscientious, responsible docs out there, and three idiots.
Atellez, you and your friends who do not wish to follow the laws of society, created by people who you (may or may not) have voted for are welcome to create your own schools. Those schools will be for those who do not like public health policies. Oh, heck, make it your own little church school: "The Special Little Snowflake Church Against Public Health."
"You know what this bill has nothing to do with vaccines. It is about our freedom to make our own decisions on what we choose to inject in our body or our children's body. This is directed to the author of the aforementioned article. You sheep always want to make us people that are self thinkers look out to be some kind of freaks or antivaccines activest."
What does AB 2109 have to "do with"...aside from vaccines?
I don't see where the bill abridges your rights; where in the bill does it say that?
You're not anti-vaccine...what vaccines have you chosen to give your children and which vaccines have you determined to be inappropriate for your children?
And yet you do believe without question everything AoA tells you, no matter how ridiculous.
Actually I don't know that--can you provide a coherent argument demonstrating how this bill explicitly addressing exemptions from required childhood vaccinations somehow doesn't address exemptions from required childhood vaccinations?
No one here is suggesting that you should. I would suggest that you don't automatically disbelieve what you're told for no reason other than it comes from doctors, pharmaceutical compamies or the government.
We have, and if you've followed your own advice and done that same research you will agree that severe side effects associated with immunization are extremely rare, such that the risk associated with immunization is far, far less than the risks associated with remaining vulnerable to infection--right?
Nothing at all that I'm aware of--can you offer any reason to believe asome additional public health initiative, involving the administration of something other than vaccines, is looming on the horizon? Or are you simply pointing to the same slippery slope that must inevitably to lead to humans marrying their siblings and/or pets now that same sex marriages are being recognized?
Because choices often are ethically constrained rather than free, especially when they impact public health or safety. We don't have the unrestricted 'freedom of choice' to drink and drive as doing so is to place others at risk. Why would anyone then presume the unrestricted freedom of choice to opt out of routine immunization, when doing so also places others at risk by compromising herd immunity?
If you're such an advocate of "Freedom of choice!!!!", why are you whining about the choice being made by the physicians in your area?
All I hear is a bunch of smart ass, condescending, know it alls. Not one of you have asked my point of view because I'm just a freak, right? I agree with getting vacincines if you come here from another country or going to another country. I also agree to more LONGTERM research
on what vaccines do. I know doctors are not trained on vaccine longterm and short term side effects and how to spot them. I do not belive in adminstering over 35 different vaccinnations by the age of 1 year old into a small body. people that were born in say in the 1970s were only given 12 different vaccinations. I am heathy as a horse. My father only had 3 vaccinations back in the 1940s he is heathy as a horse. I have been to, as some of you put it filthy Mexico plenty of times and my father a educator of forty years has worked with filthy low income children from other countries and has been to Mexico plenty of times his self and is heath as a horse. Also the vaccinations all you talk about are all cleared out of your system by now if your over the age of thirty. So you are all a danger to your and everyone's children cause I am sure all of you righteous people take all your boosters to keep up to date. So go ahead with your insults aspeacially the jerk off that wants to attach my fartherhood (YOU HAVE NO IDEA BUDDY!!!) go ahead keep eating mc donald's, going to home depot, watching your fox news, taking all the pills the doctor tells you to take and I hope when you have your children vaccinated due to the current schedule that your child doesn't get really sick or die cause I would not wish that even on the jerk off that attached my farther hood!!! I will not reponed to anymore of you idiots on this website cause this is a website for sheep!!!! Apprantly when someone comes on this site with a different point of view they are attached and called names and shit talking start.. To all you sheep....... Good day
"Not one of you have asked my point of view because I'm just a freak, right?"
Perhaps we thought that, perhaps not.
On the plus side, after your crazy rant, if we did have those suspicions, they have been confirmed. Really confirmed.
And what is your medical training? Why do you think you know more than the majority of practicing pediatricians?
Have you ever heard of the children's author Roald Dahl? He wrote Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, plus many more. Why does the dedication to The BFG say:
20 April 1955 - 17 November 1962
Who here has called Mexico filthy? It has a higher vaccine uptake than the USA, see my comment #48 above.
You obviously don't read this blog much, or your reading comprehension is very poor. I believe the latter, with the evidence being the level of literacy of your screed and comments like "some of you put it filthy Mexico."
I also agree to more LONGTERM research
on what vaccines do.
Do you have any specific intelligent thing to say about the longterm research that's already been done?
I know doctors are not trained on vaccine longterm and short term side effects and how to spot them.
You know this...how?
I "attached my farther hood" once with staples, but it eventually came loose. I might have to just sew it on.
Could you please, if you are so concerned about this issue, direct us to the research showing that there is a problem with the current vaccines or vaccination schedule?
Also, to help us better understand where you are coming from, what research have you done that, for example, the AAP (who help come up with the recommended schedule each year) have not done?
Oh, and again, why are you opposed to educating parents?
I sure hope atellez and partner aren't going to home-school the atellez spawn.
What do McDonald's, Home Depot and Fox News have to do with supporting AB2109? I'm really at a loss here.
Our freedoms are slowly being taken away.
Lemme guess...you said the same thing to your parents every time they tried to get you to wash your ass or clean up your room, right?
Aren't anti-vax loonies usually the ones watching Fox News?
Ateliez: If you deny your children commonsense preventative medical care -- such as vaccines -- based on your lack of knowledge and your inflated sense of entitlement, then hell yes, I'm going to attack your fatherhood. You're a lousy parent, just as bad as the guy I used to know who refused to buckle up his kids because he knew, he just knew that seatbelts don't work.
Don't post on a board run by and frequented by scientists and medical professionals (and interested laypersons), spout crap unsupported by research, and expect to get a bye. Not going to happen, "buddy."
Why do you oppose getting vaccines if you are a resident of this country, or are not planning to travel? Surely you don't think that only foreigners are susceptible or carry infectious diseases.
What more research do you believe is necesary, given that we've been nvestigating 'what vaccines do' for more than 5 decades?
What longterm side effects are you referring to here, exactly?
Why not? Can you provide any actual evdence that doing so poses a problem?
And as a consequence were not protected as well or against as many different strains as people born today are.
Good for you--did you have a point?
Good for him--again, did you have a point?
You've both been very lucky--congratulations. But the fact you've been lucky with respect to infection doesn't argue against vaccination any more strongly than claiming "I've driven at high speeds on all sorts of bad roads and never been in an accident!" argues against wearing seat belts.
Which argues strongly in support of receiving booster immunizations as necesary, to maintain sufficient antibody titers--right? Certainly it dosen't argue against immunization.
Can't speak for anyone else, but I do. Do you?
Having a different point of view isn't necessary a good thing in and of itself. If that point of view is without merit it's quite the opposite--and so far you've offered nothing that suggests your opposition to immunization on the basis of some principle of 'freedom of choice' isn't simply reflective of self interest and a sense of entitlement.
My father had none and he nearly died of a tetanus infection when he was an otherwise healthy child. I've had more vaccines than our children and am "healthy as a horse".
There, my anecdotes are better than yours.
I asked you some questions (my post # 106)...and you have not answered them, why?
(About your interpretation of, and statement about, AB 2109-not being (just) about vaccines):
"What does AB 2109 have to "do with"...aside from vaccines?
I don't see where the bill abridges your rights; where in the bill does it say that?
You're not anti-vaccine...what vaccines have you chosen to give your children and which vaccines have you determined to be inappropriate for your children?"
Also Atelliz, has anyone here referred to Mexicans as "dirty"?
What, by the way, are your specific qualifications to speak about vaccines?
What university-conferred degree do you possess?
Are you a licensed physician, nurse or certified in any health care profession?
Do you actually work in the health care field (?) (In what capacity?)
hint: When you post on this blog...or any blog...you should be prepared to provide proof, such as citations from peer-reviewed journals and your *educated* interpretation of the science of immunology. (*Talking Points* that you read on the Canary Party website or the National Vaccine Information Center and/or Age of Autism websites, don't count.)
Ah, so those silly idiots that caught the measles, it's just their fault that they aren't healthy like you and your father.
I bow to your wonderful health, and admit that I can't promise that I will have horse-like health. Sorry. Therefore, I would be better relying on vaccines to help prevent me from disease.
Then again, you might want to spread the word to your anti-vax buddies that they also need to step it up. As was pointed out the other day, in the recent US outbreak, non-vaccinated folks are 60 times more likely to have caught the measles than use poor saps who relied on vaccinations. Apparently, their healthy lifestyles aren't quite cutting it.
If your viewpoint is that parents have unabridged freedom to make decisions on behalf of their children without concomitant responsibility - and constraint - to act in their children's best interests, then I submit that you are effectively sanctioning parents violating their chidlren's rights.
In addition, acting in the best interests of one's children entails being correctly informed (that is, that the basis for advocacy is validated evidence and valid inference) on the issues affecting chldren in one's society.
Your posts show that you appear to be ill-informed on children's medical & health matters, and further that you appear to believe that your parental decision-making trumps consideration of your children's best interests or their rights to person. I do not think remarking that suboptimal parenting would result from such a combination is too far off the mark.
Finally, if there is one misconception that should be addressed, should you choose to return, it is this:
I do not think it a stretch to say that nobody who is a regular commenter at Respectul Insolence will care very much about your point of view on its own. What we do care about is how you have derived your beliefs regarding pediatric medical care, and in particular regarding vaccines - that is, we care about whether you have any evidence to support your beliefs or not.
Well, I know Th1Th2 is attached, that's for sure. She can't live without us.
Nothing to see here but bullies. Now why don't these tough guys go back to the measles thread. I'm waiting. Yooohoooo...
I think you may mean teched.
@ brian...I think Ren may have meant "tetched" as in "tetched in the haid" :-)
"The Southern version of this state, touched in the head (presumably with the finger of God), often phrased as tetched in the haid, like or simply tetched, is similar."
Now you all be good little boys and girls and do what your told.....
@Attellez- actually they are brainwashed, programmed robots who are also in denial, narcissistic and arrogant.
Don't insult sheep.
@ Atellez: I've tried to question you about your opinions on California AB 2109, you know, aside from your libertarian rants...and have been unsuccessful.
I have to believe that you...
-Are an ignorant, uneducated right-wing fool
-Are unable to read or comprehend the content of AB 2109
-*Claim* to be a good father, but have allowed your one-track political leanings to becloud your judgment about preventive medical care for your children.
-Are an idiot, who is clueless about responsible parenting and should have given thought to what you perceive as *attaching your fatherhood*, by posters here.
-Are deserving of all the scorn that has been heaped upon you.
Say baaa-baaa now, idiot.
So, Atellez and lurker, unable to cogently answer any of the questions posted respond with random insults.
Right, it is obvious that is the extent of their thinking and quality of evidence evidence.
As a born and raised Mexican, if any of my science-defending, woo-attacking friends on RI here were to call anyone of any nationality "dirty" solely due to their nationality or ethnicity, I would boycott this site. If anything, it is a well-known troll that denies science and calls us all sheeple too that once referred to me with a racial epithet. So Atellez, you're full of it.
"@Attellez- actually they are brainwashed, programmed robots who are also in denial, narcissistic and arrogant.
Don't insult sheep."
And lurker, you are strictly an amateurish troll.
Silly lurker, still think that hanging out on this blog, will convey some sort of legitimacy to your inane posts here?
"Now you all be good little boys and girls and do what your told....."
Why is it that pro-health blogs freely allow people like you to post your brilliant bits of wisdom, while anti-vax blogs boast of censoring all opposing thoughts? Which side is treating people like sheep?
You are a big talker behind your computer screen...... that's it more insults to show how educated you all are. Come on keep talking ..... You are all fear based.... Yes sickness and death happen everyday with or without vaccines.... NEVER TOLD ANY OF YOU PEOPLE I DID NOT WANT TO VACCINATE.... Just said I did not agree with the current vaccine schedule.... But you people get on here and evaluate my writing or how I wrote it. If you are all so smart why don't you look at my post again. But, I'm the crazy one... You all just don't like anyone asking questions. Just follow the program... like sheep and don't ask... So, let me ask all you doctors, scientist, know it alls....? Is there a risk short term and longterm effects from vaccines and if so what are they? and are you willing to take that chance with your children. the VAERS reporting system listed 352,650 reports of vaccine adverse events as of 11/17/10. the former FDA commissioner David Kessler wrote in the JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASS. that only 1% of serious adverse events are reported to the FDA... we can go on for days but I am sure you will all have shit to talk. I can type for days with facts and research but I can't combat all of you and the decades of brain washing you have all received and your lack of thinking out of the box. But all those parents that reported those vaccine adverse events are all crazy like me. none of them are just regular parents that now their children are damaged due to vaccines.. you all talk about the kids dieing from diseases. What about all the parents and kids that have a life of suffering because they trusted the system I GUESS THEY ARE ALL CRAZY TOO
"My father only had 3 vaccinations back in the 1940s he is heathy as a horse"
My father and all of his mates born before 1930 didn't have too many. Wonder why 2 of his mates died and he was the only survivor - when they contracted polio. Couldn't be for want of a vaccination, could it?
And his aunt died in the influenza epidemic after WW1, you don't think a vaccination might have kept her alive to raise her infant children herself?
Until I see a study that compares vaccinated vs. selectively vaccinated or unvaxed
children and their health outcomes, nothing anyone of you has posted has proven that the current vaccine schedule vs 1980's schedule has reduced the childhood
incidence of vaccine preventable diseases more than a fraction of cases. During that time span Developmental Disabilities has risen to 1 in 6.
"Prevalence of autism increased 289.5%; Prevalence of ADHD increased 33.0%
over the last 12 years"
Prove to us that you can think for yourself. These words are on the official entry to the VAERS database: "Please read the following statement on the limits of VAERS data. You MUST click on the box below to access the VAERS database."
Now tell us what you must read and understand before using the VAERS database. Explain clearly what the paragraphs tell us.
Infection-promoting blogs like SBM and RI do not sound like pro-health to me. Now make yourself useful and tell Orac to stop censoring "opposing thoughts" and debate like a real man.
Date: 4/24/2012 1642. Censor mode on.
Right on Lurker!!!!!! Ummm Chris I'm not a sheep like you... I don't have to read or tell you anything... you go ahead and vaccinate as you like. When is enough? Its is 70 vaccinations by the age 18yrs old. Maybe they will make it 120 vaccinations... You keep pumping your family with vaccinations ... I think and choose for myself and my family... More people die walking across the street than some as your fear based people call it OUTBREAKS ... I will take my chances instead of intenionally injecting my children with current vaccination plan... Come on people keep Talking Shit..
. I can type for days with facts and research
Then why don't you? Prove us wrong.
(Oh, and if you bothered to read before posting, you'd find out that the parents on this board do vaccinate their children).
atellez @138 (or so)
Actually one reason I like this site and the commentariat is how many intelligent, meaningful questions are asked and answered, like today's post on cancer treatment in Europe vs. US.
What you have done is come in, shouted a bunch of not-very-factual "questions" that have been addressed and answered again and again and again and again. Yes, the short term effects of vaccines and the long term effects of vaccines have been studied.
What you don't seem to understand is that the US vaccination schedule has indeed been questioned, not only here but other science and medicine sites. Questioned and found to be the best choice for ensuring public health.
In fact, one of the questions asked and answered is what does that mean? One of the frequent commenters here who blogs at The Poxes wrote a two-part introduction to understanding the VAERS: VAERS Part I and VAERS Part II.
Some advice for you: google "pablo's first law of internet discussion".
o ya dont you smart people like hard facts ??? looks like me and Lurker just gave you some and yet you have shit to say...
I don't have to read
The only reason dissenting opinions are allowed on this blog is because the bullies enjoy their bad, immature behavior and their need for feeling superior. They and the surgeon blogger relish the nastiness of it. Like they think they are educating?
Cause I don't have to. Simple as that. I just gave you a sample.. Shay is that a girls or boys name???
Atellez writes: "I don't have to read"
Yep. You certainly don't have to. Just keep listening to your masters, who keep you ignorant and obedient, and you'll be fine. Don't ever read anything by anyone who disagrees with you; that just leads to thought - and you wouldn't want that. Congratulations! You'll never change your mind about anything and will die as ignorantly as you lived.
"Is there a risk short term and longterm effects from vaccines and if so what are they?"
Already answered in the CDC website.
"and are you willing to take that chance with your children"
Considering that vaccines are much, much safer than contracting the diseases that they protect against, yes, I am willing to take the chance if I ever have children. Simple weighing of benefits and risks.
Paging Dr. Dunning and Dr. Kruger...
I would love some, which is why I asked you a specific question. You brought up the VAERS data, and I am asking what you must understand before you use that data. So, come on, answer the question.
I also asked you about why Roald Dahl's book The BFG is dedicated to a child who died when she was seven years old. So, please answer that question.
Show us by stating with real hard facts in the form of the title, journal and dates of PubMed indexed papers exactly how the present vaccine schedule is detrimental.
No shay you got us all confused you just told me all bout urself. I just don't need to justy myself because you are not my judge and jury and your are not above me. Like I told Chris keep injected vaccines into your body and your kids we will see what happens. Never shay never o i mean say never.
"The IOM will conduct an independent assessment surrounding the feasibility of studying health outcomes in children who were vaccinated according to the CDC recommended schedule and those who were not (e.g. children who were unvaccinated or vaccinated with an alternate schedule). The IOM will review scientific findings and stakeholder concerns related to the safety of the recommended childhood immunization schedule. Further, the IOM will identify potential research approaches, methodologies, and study designs that could inform this question, including an assessment of the potential strengths and limitations of each approach, methodology and design, as well as the financial and ethical feasibility of doing them. A report will be issued in mid-2012 summarizing the IOM's findings and conclusions."
Atellez, answer the questions please. Be sure to back up your statements with some actual verifiable evidence.
Have a comment in moderation. In the meantime, atellez made a claim, and so I googled "David Kessler" 1% "serious adverse events are reported to the FDA"
Top results? The Refusers! Whale.to! Chiropractors!
Now I am going to have to chase down the real quote, in case atellez & friends are graduates of the Robert F. Kennedy jr. School of Journalism.
let me guess you are all med students or some shit, Chris, Shay, FIllipinomed, and this semester you are all working on vaccinations.... I gotta go... Keep on injecting!!!!!!!
Well, lurker and Ateliez are having fun stroking each other's back. Lurker once again came out with the impossible "faxed vs untaxed" study. Why can't they understand how unethical it would be? And Areliez obviously has never looked at VAERS or tried to use it.
If I didn't have a headache I'd probably hang around to view the fun. Keep your teeth sharp and your fur sniny, all!
lurker, the IOM has already made its report. Vaccines are safe.
Again, if you do not like the results then have your anti-vax masters pay for a properly designed study (hint: not a phone survey).
Anyone care to bet that Atelliez continues to post insults rather than answer questions?
Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?
What would cause you to conclude, Atelliez, that the posters on this board are not fully vaccinated and do not vaccinate their children? Following up on what FilipinoMDStudent said, I get vaccinated myself. Seasonal flu every year, hep B because there is a rather remote risk I might be exposed to bloodborne pathogens in my job and I'd rather be safe than sorry, shingles (yay!) because people who were born before chicken pox vaccine was widely available are susceptible (I wouldn't wish shingles on anybody, Atelliez, even someone like you), Tdap.
Based on the evidence, as opposed to the appeals to emotion, it's the only intelligent thing to do.
"Why can't they understand how unethical it would be?"
Because they don't think that vaccines have been proven to be beneficial. Ergo, they think it is not unethical that the placebo group is left susceptible to vaccine-preventable diseases. But as I'm writing this reply, I suddenly realized your question may have been rhetorical, rendering my point moot.
Wrong. I am a parent of a child who had seizures due to actually getting a disease before the vaccine was available.
Now, answer the questions.
@Chris-you're confusing the IOM reports. READ the link!
I'm sure you'll have no problem providing a reference, right? Since this is your claim, it falls upon you to provide the evidence to show that it is accurate.
I'm sure you'll have no problem providing references to papers in the scientific literature to support your positions, then. Right?
This appears to be the source of the 1% statement. Can someone with more medical knowledge interpret it for context?
@Chris-The results will be reported mid 2012 -IT'S THE SCHEDULE this time
"Assessment of Studies of Health Outcomes Related to the Recommended Childhood Immunization Schedule"
See, that would depend on you actually providing hard facts.
So far, that hasn't happened.
Went to the link, lurker.
"The IOM will conduct an independent assessment surrounding the feasibility of studying health outcomes in children who were vaccinated according to the CDC recommended schedule and those who were not (e.g. children who were unvaccinated or vaccinated with an alternate schedule). The IOM will review scientific findings and stakeholder concerns related to the safety of the recommended childhood immunization schedule. Further, the IOM will identify potential research approaches, methodologies, and study designs that could inform this question, including an assessment of the potential strengths and limitations of each approach, methodology and design, as well as the financial and ethical feasibility of doing them."
This is your smoking gun? I know "feasibility" is a long word, but you can look it up. There are online dictionaries out there, you know.
Assessment of Studies of Health Outcomes Related to the Recommended Childhood Immunization Schedule May Meeting
You did not provide one. The "results" to the link you did provide is one the feasibility of the study, that is what "assessment of studies" means.
The Adverse Effects of Vaccines: Evidence and Causality indicates that vaccines are safe.
Which is precisely the point of the legislation. It is because of folks like you who will not read, nor understand what you read the real information.
"The only reason dissenting opinions are allowed on this blog is because the bullies enjoy their bad, immature behavior and their need for feeling superior. They and the surgeon blogger relish the nastiness of it. Like they think they are educating?"
Right so dissenting opinions here are allowed so we can laugh at how stupid you people are. Reasonable inference.
Presumably, then, our comments are censored on anti-vax blogs because we make them look stupid?
And since it came up, my current title is biodefense fellow.
@Shay- no smoking gun- just parents with disabled children wanting an answer and there are a lot of them which this blog summarily dismisses.
My son is disabled. Though not from a vaccine, but from the effects of a disease. Why do you and your friends dismiss the victims of the diseases?
This is why you need to tell us what evidence there is that the vaccines are more dangerous than the diseases.
Marc Stephens is Insane:
Although I am no medical professional, I do note that the document you linked to dates from 1993. In addition, the programme it is rolling out is meant to address issues of under-reporting, so IMO Atallez et al need to find more recent work to show that this hasn't been addressed if they wish to assert that adverse effect reporting remains at 1% through to the present and expect to be taken seriously.
In addition, the reference given for the 1% figure is from a single study so if it wasn't replicated it can hardly be said to be a slam-dunk.
The cite Kessler gives is:
Scott HD, Rosenbaum SE, Waters WJ, et al. Rhode Island physicians' recognition and reporting of adverse drug reactions. RIMed J. 1987;70:311316
Here's the PubMed link to Scott et al 1987.
I should note that when I tried to find this paper online I kept getting this paper (Scott et al 1990) which appears to be a follow-up to the 1987 paper.
@Chris-don't pull that trump card. Everyone knows about polio victims, measles victims- vaccine preventable diseases that vaccines have helped. THE POINT-
The current schedule of all those vaccines to an infant has not been proven safe.
Lurker, you lie like a rug, as anyone who has spent time reading the posters here knows. The only people summarily dismissed are the ones who come racing through, deposit a steamin' load of horseshit, and then do the pearl-clutch (but rarely stick the flounce). The parents who honestly and without a pre-conceived agenda, come looking for answers, tend to be treated with consideration.
And then there are dimwits like you who deserve every nasty thing that's tossed your way, you illiterate piece of crap.
@Shay-your brilliance dazzles me.
So lurker tries to use disabled children as a reason to examine the vaccine schedule and then complains when Chris comes right back with an argument, this time for vaccines, using disabled children?
lurker, the word "hypocrite" applies here. To you.
When will you get it through your head that it isn't the vaccines which have been examined six ways to Sunday and in numerous countries with numerous investigators and millions of dollars? Of course parents want answers but they have to wait for proper research to be conducted on what is biologically-plausible and accept evidence for what doesn't cause autism (which isn't 1:6; that's a dishonest number that gets bandied about). And one last thing; these groups you follow and believe uncritically have had years and several offers by investigators to conduct a study. They have the money but have refused the offers and instead spent the money on billboards and other adverts. Not finding autism aetiologies, not providing medical or educational assistance and not conducting studies to answer their own questions. For what? And you have the nerve to come here and wag your wrinkled old finger. It's pointed in the wrong direction lady.
What is always hilarious for me is when a contrarian asserts that SB commenters are like sheep immediately after parrotting a nearly exact replication of what I have heard from those who I survey. Unfortunately, I have heard the same nonsense echoed so frequently that I can probably reproduce the tripe in excruciatingly accurate detail- however, because I wish to cause no one pain, I will spare you the minutiae. Instead:
Woo-meisters attack SB topics in the following way:
they usually have a single study that they say 'disproves' consensus ( how could one study do that?). Then they may have a statement that indicts either a pharmaceutical company, a governmental agency or a media outlet of some wrong-doing ( as if that proves everything else they say is wrong). Then they attack people's characters- specifically or in general.
Usually each topic revolves around a few central ideas: for vaccines - no study of unvaccinated vs vaccinated, the illnesses were "mild", toxic Hg/ Al, rising rates of autism and chronic ills, etc; for HIV/AIDS - the virus was never isolated, meds do more harm than good, sculduggery by Dr Gallo, etc; for chemotherapy- no one is cured, "poison, cut and burn", the meds cause cancer, etc; meds for mental illness- no proof of biological basis (chemical imbalance), illnesses are 'created' by pharmaceutical companies and mh professionals ( pathologising everyday life), meds cause worse symptoms, etc.
In short, they seem to be saying that the illness is not the problem, the cures are! Cures are contrived by corrupt doctors and companies for profit while the government and media act as enablers.
Reading this makes me nauseous-
What are the ingredients in ROTARIX? ROTARIX contains weakened human rotavirus. also contains dextran, sorbitol, xanthan, and Dulbeccoâs Modified Eagle Medium (DMEM). The ingredients of DMEM are as follows: sodium chloride, potassium chloride, magnesium sulphate, ferric (III) nitrate, sodium phosphate, sodium pyruvate, D-glucose, concentrated vitamin solution, L-cystine, L-tyrosine, amino acids solution, L-glutamine, calcium chloride, sodium hydrogenocarbonate, and phenol red. Porcine circovirus type 1 (PCV-1), a virus found in pigs, is present in ROTARIX. ROTARIX contains no preservatives. The dropper used to give your baby ROTARIX may contain latex. ROTARIX is a registered trademark of GlaxoSmithKline. 561
And our question has been why don't you agree? CYou haven't offered any evidence suggesting that it isn't effective at reducing incidence of infection or is less safe than remaining vulnerable to infection.
See http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/safety/default.htm for information regarding side effects known to be associated with immunization. Serious side effects are extremely rare
What chance are you talking about here? If you have any actual evidence that immunizing children places them at significant risk by all means share it with us.
And at the VAERS site we find (bold for emphasis)
No one is saying they're crazy--just that the fact they sincerely believe their children were harmed by vaccines isn't enough to establish they were in fact harmed by vaccines.
How exactly have you established a causal relationship between vaccination and whatever damage these children have suffered? It's on some basis other than temporal association, I trust.
You're speaking as if it had been proven that the suffering is a consequence of childhood immunization, when that simply isn't the case. Why?
lurker, if you are going to complain about the ingredients, then please have the goodness to actually understand what they are.
I happen to like bacon. It also contains porcine DNA (possibly a few very dead viruses), and plenty of sodium chloride.
Dangers Associated With L-Glutamine
Lurker, that link is to an article on a diet and fitness site warning against taking L-glutamine supplements. Your point, if you have one, is what?
"In human blood, glutamine is the most abundant free amino acid, with a concentration of about 500-900 Âµmol/L."
Brosnan, John T. (2003), "Interorgan amino acid transport and its regulation", J. Nutr. 133 (6): 2068Sâ72S, PMID 12771367
"Glutamine is the most abundant naturally occurring, non-essential amino acid in the human body and one of the few amino acids that can directly cross the blood-brain barrier. In the body, it is found circulating in the blood as well as stored in the skeletal muscles."
Glutamine, University of Maryland Medical Center, retrieved 2009-09-06.
Damn I'm scared.
lurker, are you back to linking to random websites and changing the subject to supplements! The article is about popping pills of the stuff, it has nothing to do with the teeny tiny amount in any vaccine.
"228,000 lives saved per year by the Rotavirus vaccine."
Rheingans RD, Antil L, Dreibelbis R, Podewils LJ, Bresee JS, Parashar UD (2009). "Economic costs of rotavirus gastroenteritis and cost-effectiveness of vaccination in developing countries". J Infect Dis 200 (Suppl 1): S16â27. doi:10.1086/605026. PMID 19817595.
damn I'm scared.
This for all of us being called sheeple.
Using the word "sheeple" violates a corollary of Godwin's Law. I think it came under the ruling "Godwin vs Kool-aid 2011"
It could be worse. I have a woo friend and she just posted a screed about the H1N1. It listed Potassium Chloride as a neurotoxin. I didn't even know where to start. I just asked her if she knew how many potassium and chloride ions were in her bloodstream compared to what was in the vaccine. No answer yet.
Mr. Bray: I was urged the other day to start making my own soap and laundry detergent so they wouldn't be full of chemicals.
Mr. Bray, I sometimes wonder if anti-vax types like lurker would be frightened by a small bag of fertilizer. Oh noes... fertilizer has potassium and phosphorus, plus lots of other chemicals!
Shay, you gonna boil some tallow with a bit of Drano? Natures way?
Shay, that was obviously a suggestion by someone who has never made soap from scratch. Or did it the original from scratch, where you get the lye by using wood ash and water.
I found . Apparently the lye is strong enough when it can dissolve a chicken feather.
By the way, I have never made soap from scratch. The reason is that I read the instructions in a book my dad bought decades ago. I'll stick to buying some chunks to melt at a craft store, thank you very much!
(There is someone who sometimes comments here who does make soap from scratch, if she shows up I will defer to her experience!)
I guess I'd better start saving up my urine and wood ashes, 'cos they're "natural."
Just as I hit "post" it occurred to me to preview first. Yep, it is screwed up, tried to say "I found instructions" ... but the link works okay.
Let me translate for you:
in Woo-speak, *chemicals* are produced artificially in factories- unlike nature's wondrous pharmacopaedia of phyto-ceuticals which emerge fully formed from pure sun, wind, earth and water.
There is one exception to this rule:
supplements produced by the woo-meister who's doing the talking are wondrously pure and natural phyto-nutrients formed of unsullied sun, wind, earth and water, which happen to be brought to fruition in factories.
Chris, the individual who gave me this advice also gave me her soap recipe.
(Wait for it...)
She purchases bars of very expensive "organic" soap, shaves them, melts them in a little water, and then pours them into molds (I wish I was making this up. This is a college-educated woman).
She got very shirty with me when I sent her the recipe for soap making from Mrs. Child's The Frugal American Housewife circa 1830.
The anti-vax drive posting troll lifted this pasta/word salad,"the VAERS reporting system listed 352,650 reports of vaccine adverse events as of 11/17/10. the former FDA commissioner David Kessler wrote in the JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASS. that only 1% of serious adverse events are reported to the FDA.." directly from a nutrition book.
"Performance Without Pain"
Don't try to link to this book...my Kaspersky Protection has all sorts of warnings up when I tried to link to Performancewithoutpain.com.
Here's a safe Amazon link
The book has a chapter about autism. It is written by a *nutrition specialist* and a chiropractor.
lurky, are you still around? Isn't it past your bedtime grandma? What did your gerontologist tell you about your condition and "sundowning"?
And I am willing to bet it is because you are a willfully ignorant douchecanoe. But hey, let's see what my high school chemistry and Google-U produces, shall we?
Holy fuck. Better never drink wine again.
Crap. There goes chewing gum, mouthwash, toothpaste, and crap, no more make-up, either.
I'm just going to assume you mean Xanthan gum here. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Oh, crippity crap. Chewing gum and make-up are double-super-bad now. This also rules out most salad dressings and other sauces. And to make sure it doesn't get into the environment, we'd also better stop using gasoline and plastic.
Jeepers Creepers, Batman! That MUST be eeeeevil!
Salt! Salt! It's evil! Bomb every restaurant right now! They have poison on their tables!
Holy shit, a POTASSIUM SALT? That's just evil! I mean, it's not like potassium is an everyday and necessary element in a bunch of bodily processes, right. Hey, it's not like potassium chloride is commercially sold as a supplement for people deathly ill from potassium deficiency, right.
Epsom salt! There's epsom salt in there!
You know what? I'm done. I don't even know what is more offensive: that you are stupid enough to post this for all the world to see or that you think other people are too stupid to know what these ingredients actually are.
You are pathetic and dumb as a sack of hammers. Cut your losses and LEAVE.
Shay, that is hilarious!
You can make it up to by telling her she can buy goat milk soap at JoAnn's.
When you say "melts them in a little water", I hope you mean in bain marie, a type of double boiler. I use an old glass measuring cup in a pot of simmering water.
Shay, that is very funny.
Damn moderation. Scroll up later party people, I have a long one coming up for our little lurker linky troll.
You know even a stopped clock is right twice a day. The anti-vaxxers are always on about "adverse effects aren't reported!!1!1!"
Well, whaddya know, somebody quantified it. With a study. In one state. For one vaccine. (Hint: F.L.U.)
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2012 Mar;21(3):269-75. doi: 10.1002/pds.2245. Epub 2011 Sep 29.
Assessing vaccine safety communication with healthcare providers in a large urban county.
Note that this was the FLU vaccine, which is distributed in many more ways than the pediatric vaccines. (I've gotten my last 3 flu vaxes as three different grocery stores with attached pharmacies.)
It might be worth-while doing a similar study on two of the more reactogenic of the pediatric vaccines. I suspect the Tdap still comes in for a lot of criticism, as does the MMR.
I will excuse your insults and lack of civility as due to mercury poisoning-( still in flu shots-) the neurotoxin does accumulate.
Lurker at 138
We have been over this so many times. One more won't hurt.
"Developmentally Disabled" sounds horrible and scary, doesn't it? Like a child who will never learn, or never live independently in adulthood?
The facts are otherwise.
The source of the "one in six" is a paper in Pediatrics, Boyle et al. (2011) Trends in the Prevalence of Developmental Disabilities in US Children, 1997â2008 Pediatrics. 2011 Jun;127(6):1034-42. Epub 2011 May 23. doi: 10.1542/peds.2010-2989)
Parent-reported diagnoses of the following were included: attention deficit hyperactivity disorder; intellectual disability; cerebral palsy; autism; seizures;stuttering or stammering; moderate to profound hearing loss; blindness; learning disorders; and/or other developmental delays.
Screening for and remediating learning disorders are my areas of expertise. I would say the one in six figure (16.6%) is possibly low. Dyslexia is classed as a developmental disability. Some dyslexia experts put the actual prevalence rate at up to 20%.
Lurky@208. How generous of you! And to what do you attribute your inability to grasp basic chemistry, not to mention your hypocrisy, dishonesty, and failure to read your own links?
Please tell me which if my comments contain insults and lack of civility. Was it when I asked you to be good enough to learn about the ingredients you posted? Or when I noted that an article on supplements was not about vaccines? Or was it when I mentioned that you might be frightened by fertilizer?
Or was it when I reminded you that more children are disabled by diseases than vaccines after you said "- just parents with disabled children wanting an answer and there are a lot of them which this blog summarily dismisses."
So exactly why do you dismiss children who are permanently injured by mumps, measles, hib, pertussis, polio, congenital rubella syndrome and meningitis? Don't they count?
Doesn't Olivia Dahl count? Do any of these kids count?
If you care about kids, you will tell me truthfully the real risk between vaccines and the diseases. You need to give me the title, journal and dates of the PubMed index papers that show that the MMR is more dangerous than measles, mumps and rubella. Then do the same for each and every vaccine.
Or is it an "insult" and "lack of civility" to actually have you stay on subject and provide verifiable scientific documentation for your claims?
@203@stuv- I am referring to a 2 month old with possible auto-immune issues that may not be evidenced at that age- "the dose makes the poison"
You mention wine, chewing gum-Really now? Your brilliance dazzles me.
And lurky, I won't excuse your posting of inanities.
It's way past your bedtime grandma troll. Say goodnight, lurky
@ Stu...just a spectacular post...thanks.
The anti-vaxxer folk want, it seems to me, three things: acknowledgment that their children are ill (or damaged and ill) AND acknowledgment that "the vaccines" did it AND complete acceptance of their narrative of the first two things.
Questioning any of the three things is somehow an assault on the integrity of the person.
It gets worse when you regard a child with intense autism as neither ill nor damaged: just a person with more and different challenges. That, for some reason, is a concept the "autism is vaccine injury" brigade cannot tolerate.
Please, people. The correct term in Newspeak is doubleplusungood. Don't thank me, I'm glad to have cleared that up.
You keep repeating yourself, lurky. I'm glad to see you're so environmentally responsible -- you recycle everything, don't you?
Stu, thanks for the "douchecanoe" comment. I'm saving that one.
Because, you know, throwing down a Paracelsus quote is an acceptable substitute for scientific evidence.
Actually Lurkster the half life of Thiomersal is short, but you can always chelate
Citation needed. Make sure it is real.
Be specific with the quotes from Shay that are lies.
This reminds me of when Gayle DeLong decided that every child with Speech and Language Impairment (SLI) was autistic!
Are you dense?-TOTAL # OF VACCINES given in 2012 as opposed to 1983!
What major outbreaks caused the increase?
No, you were nauseous to start with. Do have some respect for the language.
So? My son had seizures and ended up going to the emergency department by ambulance due to one of those diseases that kids can now skip because of a vaccine.
I also spent a month with very sick kids, including a six month old baby, when chicken pox swept through are area. Only a very cruel and evil person would think it was okay dokay for a child to suffer two weeks with dozens of itchy open sores that are ripe for a secondary bacterial infection (one kid in the school got, and was close to having a limb amputated). This was a year before the vaccine became available.
Do I need to remind you again that random websites are not verifiable scientific evidence?
Retitle the blog- Insolent Denial w/o Respect for Differing Views.
By golly, the display of broken-field running Lurky has put on tonight would shame Devin Hester.
Shay, like this...
@Chris- I' m really sorry about your son but I am NOT TALKING about the measles vaccine! You are but that is not scientific evidence either for the safety of the current vaccine schedule.
*snort*. Well, Lurky can certainly juke with the best of them.
Since 1983 and 2005 there have been researchers who actually thought that less dead and disabled children was a laudable goal. They discovered vaccines for diseases that routinely killed kids year after year. Then the other people who cared about kids added them to the schedule. Progress is scary huh?
"D-glucose, concentrated vitamin solution, L-cystine, L-tyrosine, amino acids solution, L-glutamine"
Lurky you do realize that these are all found in the human body naturally. Cystine, tyrosine and glutamine are all amino acids. Hell cystine is very important part of many protiens for its ability to form Disulfide bonds. IICR tyrosine is part of many protiens,and small peptides that are part of the neurotransmitter. I also assume you know that these are all amino acids, and that they are building blocks for protiens. Though I probably shouldnt for obvious reasons. I assume the AA solution are many other amino acids. All in all that is one of your stupider comments.
So, Lurky...Chris can't use her son as evidence the vaccine schedule is safer than not vaccinating, but you can use a random (still-unidentified, where's the citation?) 2 month old as proof that it's not?
Re-title grandma's posts-lurky gets murkier w/o respect for science.
No, you were not, you lying sack of shit jackwagon. If you were, you would have brought it up right then and there. But no, you posted a "oh noes, look at all the evil ingredients" comment, hoping that everyone here is as uneducated as you are.
Your pathetic attempt at changing the subject by emotional appeal because you were caught trying to slip in a pathetic piece of fear-mongering is duly noted, by the way.
I do not have a PhD. I am not an MD. I have no more than high school chemistry. And between me and Google, it took me less than ten minutes to expose you for the lying sack of fetid tripe you are.
You posted a list of ingredients that "made you sick". I pointed out that without most of those chemicals being in your body, you would be dead right now, you twit.
But sure, as you say, "the dose makes the poison". So now the onus is on you, grandma. Go back to your pathetic attempt at scaremongering, grab every single ingredient you listed and show at the very fucking least the LD50 for subcutaneous injection for every ingredient you listed.
Go on, grandma. Prove me wrong. Show me how lethal all of that sodium chloride really is.
(Hey, by the way, did you notice there's a lot of dihydrogen monoxide in vaccines? HAVE YOU WARNED PEOPLE ABOUT ALL OF THE DIHYDROGEN MONOXIDE IN VACCINES, GRANDMA?)
Oh wait, I'm sorry. It's almost like someone (who shall remain nameless) brought up a bunch of ingredients in a pathetic attempt at fear-mongering and all I did was point out other things those ingredients were used in.
This is obvious to everyone, lurky.
Cut your losses and FUCK OFF. You are pathetic.
And again, Pinnocchio-on-a-stick... until you can tell us what you WOULD consider evidence, you're just blabbering and lying to advance your agenda.
lurker, what is your problem with making sure kids don't get sick?
Seriously when did I mention measles in comment #223?
After 1983 they added vaccines for haemophilus influenzae type b, rotavirus, varicella (chicken pox), pneumococcal disease and two type of hepatitis. Plus there was a change from OPV to IPV and from DTP to DTaP.
What you really need to do is prove to us scientifically there is a problem. Something you have failed to do.
lilady: thank you for the compliment.
all: another largish comment in moderation. There's a definite naughty word-filter in effect... I think more than one F-bomb and you're in purgatory. The funniest part is that our resident host, he of the blinking lights, is absolutely, ridiculously, to a what-the-hell-is-wrong-with-you level tolerant of the repetitive, openly trolling, superfluous and dumb as a booger in a bucket of hagfish.
So yes, there's a comment in moderation. It's really mean, too. Let's see if Anthony decides to weigh in.
"dumb as a booger in a bucket of hagfish."
In my former line of work we used to say "dumber than a box of rocks." I like yours better.
I should mention for the purpose of the subject of this article, vaccines kids need for school: rotavirus, Hib and influenza are not needed for school attendance in most states.
The only vaccines required in California to attend school are polio, diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, measles, mumps, rubella, varicella and hepatitis b.
The only ones of those that were not on the 1983 schedule is HepB and chicken pox. But since California has many people who move there where that is endemic, it is a good idea. And only a cruel and evil person would think it is okay for kids to suffer two weeks with dozens of itchy open sores from chicken pox.
Now explain to us carefully which of those are too arduous for children to get to attend school, with real citations.
None of my extended family of 20+ relatives have suffered from any serious form of
vaccine preventable illnesses prior to 1965. All have had their children vaccinated according to the schedule recommended for the relevant year. My school age grandchildren were vaccinated on a modified schedule.
I Do NOT advise anyone not to get vaccinated.
I will now temporarily flounce away.......my views unchanged by your brilliant comments.
Here is the actual schedule for school entry from the California Department of Public Health:
Note that chicken pox vaccine vaccine is a requirement and exempted only if the child's doctor verifies that the child had chicken pox, and marks the child's immunization record ("disease"), accordingly.
If you were negligent and did not make certain that your infant was immunized against Hib disease, immunizing against Hib disease is not recommended past the age of five. But then, you put your child at risk for Hib disease:
Holy canoli, I missed this gem:
Granners, here's a few pointers.
1. You will excuse? Do you visit the homes of others with this attitude? I am willing to bet you don't get out much.
2. Lack of civility? Hi, erm, granny? In polite conversation, lying and lying and lying some more is considered to be as rude as a flash-bang driver pin.
3. Name the type of mercury some multi-dose vials use as a preservative.
4. Show the dosage of those preservatives.
5. Quote any and all peer-reviewed literature that examines the dosages you determined back there in number 4. Free tip: make sure to re-read number 3.
6. Please re-examine your life and your motivations for implying that others here are denying the presence of mercury in any and all vaccines.
7. Assuming you have had great success proving (by citing objective research) that the magical autism-hi-yo! brand of mercury is responsible for it all...:
8. Put forth your medical research for peer review.
9. Wait, let me guess, you're right and EVERYBODY ELSE IS WRONGITTY-WRONG.
10. Fine. Whatever, I don't care, and neither does anyone you try to target with this inherently anti-intellectual crap.
11. This is about enough, actually. You know what you've been asked. You know you are a few notches below "a square wheels are funny" clown car as far as your intellectual stamina and honesty were concerned.
Anyway. I find myself caring less and less with each passing day. Any thoughts?
Alternatively, you can admit you are full of shit and are making things up to scare people away from vaccinations for purely ideological reasons.
My breath, it is not bated.
Lurky: your first post this evening was in support of a drive-by idiot who opposes vaccinations. You wrote:
@Attellez- actually they are brainwashed, programmed robots who are also in denial, narcissistic and arrogant.
Don't insult sheep
It's a little late for you to pull the pity-party.
"I will now temporarily flounce away.......my views unchanged by your brilliant comments."
I wonder how we could encourage grandma lurky to flounce away permanently?
We've tried reason, we've questioned her intelligence and her sanity. She must be a mighty lonely nasty old lady, who needs to get a life and some other diversions...aside from trolling.
wow i been off this site for like six hours still talking about what I wrote... Cool so all you smart people say vaccines are safe.... well I guess they are like i said before ... you keep getting vaccines and giving your kids vaccinations... Thanks, for being SHEEP..... BAAAAAAHHHHHnight O and Shay get a life you fuckin loser you been on here for hours...
Shay are you a member of this site.... you hurt my feelings when you called me a drive by idiot..... I know who you are your that kid at the park sitting there playing your hand held video game your that kid wackin off at home on your computer while other teens are playing sports or getting laid, your that kid that has no friends so you come on here so you can make your self feel good.... your a loser that likes to talk about vaccines for over 12 hours... you really need to move out your mamas house maybe get some fresh air.... maybe a mail order bride... something
Nope, the ethyl mercury in the flu shot is rapidly eliminatedx, unlike the methyl mercury in tuna (or in a bucket of hagfish).
Do I detect a sock puppet of Rob Hood, the scat-talking radio tech from Eupora, Mississippi?
It certainly posts like Rob Hood, with the filthy-mouth, the misspelled words, the mangled grammar and the deplorable lack of sentence structure.
(Don't tell me there are two such right-wing-nut idiots in this world)
Enough of the ageist comments please...its getting quite disgusting.
far too many pots calling the kettle black when those ageist retorts fly out. I note with some amusement that the oldies are the quickest to dish it out ;)
Lurky is an idiot. The fact that lurky may or may not be old is irrelevant to the discussion
ROTARIX contains [...] Dulbeccoâs Modified Eagle Medium (DMEM). [followed by a long list of DMEM ingredients]
The reason DMEM contains so many ingredients, and also the reason why traces of it are present in Rotarix, is of course that it's a mixture designed to keep mammalian cells alive. Those scary ingredients? They're nutrients.
Lurky is an idiot.
Even that is uncertain. Lurker may just play an idiot for purposes of internet trolling.
@atellez , lurker
Thanks your your idiotic postings. You have given me a good laugh at your utter ignorance.
Atellez rove to us that you can think for yourself. These words are on the official entry to the VAERS database: "Please read the following statement on the limits of VAERS data. You MUST click on the box below to access the VAERS database."
Now tell us what you must read and understand before using the VAERS database. Explain clearly what the paragraphs tell us.
Also, please support your claims that there are too many vaccines with something more substantial than insults and lots of punctuation mark: post the title, journal and dates of the PubMed index papers that indicate the vaccine schedule (especially those required to attend school in California) are too much for the average child.
And since you are obsessed with the 1983 schedule, post the title, journal and dates of the PubMed indexed papers that show that the HepB and varicella vaccines are more dangerous than the actual diseases.
"Lurky is an idiot. The fact that lurky may or may not be old is irrelevant to the discussion"
It is relevant to the discussion. The fact that lurky used her age ("I'm 68 and too old to look things up")...and the fact that she estimated my age at 60, in prior posts to avoid providing documentation for her thread-derailing posts, gives me an "oldie", the opportunity to mention her lame excuses.
And Atellez, like so many others of his ilk, fails to stick the flounce.
Chris, I'm ambivalent on the ageism; idiocy, like wisdom, is hardly age-dependent. On the other hand, Lurky did open that door herself (himself? It's hard to keep track of the trolls without a scorecard).
Shay, I have never mentioned lurky's age. I just want her to provide verifiable documentation for her statements.
Chris - that'll larn me to read signatures!
The anti-vaxxer folk want, it seems to me, three things: acknowledgment that their children are ill (or damaged and ill) AND acknowledgment that "the vaccines" did it AND complete acceptance of their narrative of the first two things.
Questioning any of the three things is somehow an assault on the integrity of the person.
It gets worse when you regard a child with intense autism as neither ill nor damaged: just a person with more and different challenges. That, for some reason, is a concept the "autism is vaccine injury" brigade cannot tolerate.
None of the "RI regulars" or Orac, have ever posted that having a child diagnosed with autism, is easy. Quite to the contrary, I and other parents who have children with disabling conditions, have acknowledged the devoted care and love that most parents provide to their children.
What I do question is the fact that some parents cling to their beliefs that vaccines "damaged" their kids. For them, any quack therapy, any dangerous invasive procedure is warranted to "cure" their children.
Let's not forget, the quacks that constitute their *List of Heroes"....
-The chemically-castrating Geiers
-The *chelating* quack practitioners
-Quacks in foreign countries who provide intrathecal *treatments* with *unknown* substances, for their children
-Andrew Wakefield, who is their idol and, who they continually support (through Wakefield's Justice Fund) and, through their *journalists* who blog about him. They refuse to acknowledge that he ordered non-medically-indicated invasive, painful and dangerous procedures for children entrusted to his care.
Let's not forget what the collective goals of the notorious anti-vaccine organizations are:
"With less than a half-dozen full-time activists, annual budgets of six figures or less, and umpteen thousand courageous, undaunted, and selfless volunteer parents, our community, held together with duct tape and bailing wire, is in the early to middle stages of bringing the U.S. vaccine program to its knees."
Their activities to scare parents away from immunizing their children, in my opinion, is the most vile threat to children and to the public health system.
We should never forget that those who buy into that egregiously nonsensible theory ( vaccines-cause-autism) are also carting around guilt and self-hatred because *somebody* had to take that innocent child to those evil doctors who inject that pharma-poison on schedule...no wonder they're screaming and blaming others!
Another lovely side-effect of that old Wakefield magic!
No it doesn't excuse the ageism . He did it first therefore I can is a purile excuse, I would expect that from a 5 year old not a person of your intellectual capacity and experiences. It only brings you down to their level, continue if you wish but I have to tell you it is a bad look.
@ delurked lurker:
Remember that "lurker" (who is pretty damn prolific with the comments for a lurker)claimed that she was too old to look things up at age 68. As another "oldie", I consider that much more of an insult than "granny" or "old fart" and well deserving of mockery.
Stop lying- I never said that-I research on PubMed and find many contradictory
studies. The current vaccine schedule has never been proven safe.
Enjoy your nutritious meal of phenol red and Porcine circovirus type 1 (PCV-1)!
@ Denice Walter...I find that the posters at AoA and other notorious anti-vax websites, are stuck-in-gear. I suspect they regret ever having a disabled child and their *coping mechanisms* run the *gamut* of "pity me", "poor me", "why me" and "martyr me". Their destructive self-pity behaviors affects their relationships within their family, society and other parents who believe their crappy science and *theories*.
Ahem, lurky is a female who identifies herself as a parent and a grandmother. She also underestimated my age at sixty.
As an "oldie", I defend the competence of other "oldies", by debunking grandma lurky's blatant self-loathing and ageism.
Lilady is stuck in archaic memes-definitely not in the "groove". She will eat humble pie
Oh by the way as a reminder from the CDC
Prevent the Spread of Norovirus
Noroviruses spread easily, causing more than 20 million gastroenteritis cases each year in the U.S. There's no vaccine to prevent norovirus infection and no drug to treat it. Wash your hands often and follow simple tips to stay virus-free.
"Some reason" can be summed up in three words: "no tort liability".
lurker, then just post the title, journal and date of the PubMed indexed paper that shows that supports your statements that the DNA in the vaccine is a problem.
The former is a water soluble dye excreted in the urine, so what? The latter is in pork products which I consume. Bacon yum. Although PCV-1 virus has not been found in rotavirus vaccines, only DNA fragments.
I am wondering why lurky continually posts about noro-virus and other pathogens such as salmonella and shigella associated with fecal-oral transmission, for which there are no vaccines...as a diversionary tactic. The subject of this particular thread is legislation (California AB 2109), that addresses the issue of parental "opting out" of vaccines that protect children against rotavirus and polio viruses...that are transmitted via the fecal-oral route.
Could it be that lurky is not "in the grove"?
@ Science Mom: You HAD TO mention bacon, didn't you! (Sigh), I am on a salt-restricted diet...it *happens* when you reach your *oldie* years.
"We found traces of PCV1 and PCV2 DNA in the rotavirus vaccine from manufacturer B. This highlights the issue of vaccine contamination and may impact on vaccine quality control."
Porcine circovirus type 2 (PCV2), identified in 1996, causes lesions in the lymph tissues, kidney, liver and lungs. A more deadly form of post-weaning disease now also is found in older pigs. PCV2 also contributes to other swine health problems, including abortion, pneumonia and systemic infection. In addition to those consequences, the newest mutation causes enlargement of the spleen and fluid in the body cavity, lungs, abdomen and intestines. h ttp://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/02/080216181232.htm
Lurker, entry to school in California does not include rotavirus vaccination. Please restrict your clutching of pearls scary stuff to vaccines that are actually part of the proposed legislation.
Despite that, the first paper does not really indicate the virus fragments are dangerous and your second link has nothing to do with vaccines.
Pediatricians considered the detection of DNA material from PCV in rotavirus vaccines a "non-issue" and reported little hesitation in continuing to recommend the vaccines. Mothers desired transparency, but ultimately trusted their pediatrician's recommendation. Both vaccines are currently approved for their intended use, and no risk of human PCV illness has been reported. Communicating this topic to pediatricians and mothers requires sensitivity to a broad range of technical understanding and personal concerns.
Try again, grandma lurky
Nothing like injecting a DNA fragment into a 2 month old - a PCV2 fragment at that.
Lurker @ 263,
Letâs do a little comparison.
From the CDC Pink Book, I get the following numbers.
Decade Morbidity MortalityDeaths/1000 cases
1950-59 5,487,332 49500.902
1960-69 2,467,193 26801.086
2000-2009 714 45.602
So, introducing the measles vaccine in the 1960âs cut morbidity and mortality in half and the measles eradication program reduced those by better than 99% along with major side effects like pneumonia (6%), blindness (1%), and encephalitis (0.1%).
For comparison, look at all the cases compensated for all vaccines combined in the 22 years of the VICP.
(696 whole-cell DTP)
So, total annual compensated claims for all vaccines combined are only 2.4% of the estimated annual cases of blindness from measles alone. Mortality claims for all vaccines (4.9 per year) are only 1% of deaths from measles alone prior to introduction of the vaccine.
Thatâs safe enough for me.
Also, check this:
Do you support adding a norovirus vaccine to the recommended vaccinations if it is demonstrated to be effective and meets Federal safety standards?
The former is a water soluble dye excreted in the urine, so what?
A non-toxic dye, present in a vaccine in homeopathic quantities as a minor constituent of a trace element. Such is its non-toxicity that Wikipedia reminds us of its use in much larger quantities:
Will lurker thank us for assuaging this cause of concern? Will she draw the lesson that if there was no foundation for one of her attempts to persuade others to share an uninformed, clueless anxiety, then perhaps her other purported anxieties are equally lacking in basis? Or will she erase the whole issue as if it never happened and move on to trolling about something else?
Hmmm, hard to predict.
Ahem, lurky is a female who identifies herself as a parent and a grandmother.
Sadly, trolls make stuff up. When seeking attention at some other blog, lurker could just as easily be an adolescent male.
I prefer evidence-based insults and the self-descriptions of a troll are not evidence.
FFS, Rotavirus vaccines are oral. Pray tell, what does swallowing some genomic fragments do? Do you think there might be millions of fragments in breastmilk? Infant formula? In the dog slobber the baby gets on their face? Breathes in? Gets, ZOMG, from cuts?
Really, get a clue lurker.
"Nothing like injecting a DNA fragment into a 2 month old - a PCV2 fragment at that."
I just can't help but wonder if this is why some of our children with autism have trouble eating,gagging,swallowing and chewing difficulties and why some seem to be wasting away.
A concerned mom
Can you explain specifically what's wrong with that?
I don't mean "oooo, DNA that sounds scary" but exactly what problem is caused. Literature references would be helpful.
a PCV2 fragment at that
There are implications here that Porcine Circovirus Type 2 is orders of magnitude worse than other possible DNA-fragment contaminants; and that lurker has some level of expertise about virology. Is it too much to ask for evidence?
I just can't help but wonder
I just can't help but wonder whether "A concerned mom" has the same address as "lurker".
How? First the vaccine is oral, there is no injection.
And instead of trying to "wonder", perhaps you could support your statement with some actual verifiable scientific documentation.
No PR, to be frank, lurker has been pulling that crap since she started posting here. PCV-1 and 2 DNA fragments were found in rotavirus vaccines, not whole virus and not live virus. Furthermore, humans don't get infected by PCVs.
Furthermore, humans don't get infected by PCVs
Perhaps lurker has mistaken the sculptures of Patricia Piccinini for documentaries.
Thanks a heap, Herr Doktor. It's going to take a while to get that one out of my mind's eye.
Ahg, snort, herr doktor bimler. Well it is on the internet so it must be twoo right?
Doktor Bimler...what no advance notice?
WARNING PUT DOWN LIQUIDS BEFORE VIEWING
I wasted my great postprandial cuppa decaf!
Given the deadpan delivery, I think herr doktor bimler has got to be one of the funniest posters here at Respectful Insolence.
Lurky this for your reading pleasure. It's from the FDA and basically says that after numerous studies the two rotavirus vaccines are safe. http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/PublicHealthFocus/ucm205585.htm
I don't expect you to read, but know it's here. Other than that as people have said it is just DNA not the whole virus. Plus pcv is not infective to humans or any other animal. In addition to that there not even sure of PCV2 is even the main cause of post weaning wasting disease, the main thing the virus causes, it might be caused by coinfection with parvovirus. PCV1 cause no morbidity in pigs.
To add to matt f's excellent post about the safety of the two rotavirus vaccines, here is a link to the history of the original RotaShield vaccine, which was removed from the vaccine schedule, once it was determined there was increased risk of intussusception:
IMO, the CDC and the FDA performed admirably...the vaccine was removed within 14 months of licensing. There was no attempt then, and no attempts now, to downplay the seriousness of adverse events associated with RotaShield vaccine.
Not as a consequence of imunization with vaccines using thimerosal as a preservative--following injection thimerosal rapidly dissociates to form ethyl mercury (not methyl mercury) and unlike methyl mercury ethyl mercury is rapidly eliminated from the body, primarily by fecal excretion.
In infants following vaccination ethyl mercury has a half-life of less than 4 days and blood mercury levels return to pre-vaccination levels by 30 days after vaccination. (see "Mercury Levels in Newborns and Infants After Receipt of Thimerosal-Containing Vaccines", Pichichero et al, Pediatrics Vol. 121 No. 2 February 1, 2008 pp. e208 -e214)
To out the risk in perspective, a single vaccine dose of vaccine from a multi dose vial incoporating thimerosal as a preservative delivers about 28 ug of ethyl mercury--about the same amount of mercury found in one small tuna fish sandwich--and the mercury the tuna fish contains is in the form of methyl mercury which has a half life of more than 70 days and does accumulate.
Yet somehow we don't see you or your fellow anti-vaxers warning about the dangers of tuna fish sandwiches and accusing people of being shills for "Big Tuna"...
Anyone else reading this thread suddenly want a ham sandwich?
Not until you mentioned wanting pork product, but now I want to go to my local butcher's and pick up their thick, tasty slices of bacon... mmmm......
I made home made three cheese mac and cheese last night. The topper was fresh grated Parmesan and crumbled thick cut hickory smoked bacon. Maybe we should have an insolent potluck?
I'll bring the tuna salad.
@ Kelly M. Bray...I already mentioned in my post # 271 above, that I am on a salt-restricted diet...it happens to us "oldies", sometimes.
Fortunately, I have found some great substitutes for the nasty salt...**Grana Padano** cheese is a great grating cheese and no-salt Swiss cheese is tasty, melted atop my homemade onion soup.
**I'm shilling now for *Big Cheese*
Rotateq safety reassurances from Merck not lilady:
"No safety or efficacy data are available from clinical trials regarding the administration of RotaTeq to infants who are potentially immunocompromised.
No safety or efficacy data are available for administration of RotaTeq to infants with a history of gastrointestinal disorders."
"In post-marketing experience, intussusception (including death) and Kawasaki disease have been reported in infants who have received RotaTeq."
So how do you really know how a 2 month old will react?
@Matt f- PCV antibodies were found in pig farmers in China.
You didn't even open the FDA link, did you, Lurky?
@Shay-The one in a whatever chance of it happening might happen to MY grandchild not some statistic. There are some auto-immune issues in the mother's family.
In other words, you didn't bother to read it because it might give you more information than you felt was necessary to make up your mind. That's rather typical of you, isn't it.
I've recommended an online dictionary to you before. Use it to find "confirmation bias," would you?
This is from the California department of food and agriculture. A FAQ of PCV. http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/ahfss/Animal_Health/porcine_Circovirus.html#Huma…. There's a difference between actual infection and having antibodies. While many times it means that a person has been infected, it does nof always mean it. Take for example myself. I probably have antibodies to tetanus, diphtheria, and pruritus to name a few but I have never been infected. While I probably should have said morbidity, my point still stands.
@ lurky...Still a cherry-picking lying troll, eh?
Do you mean this website, grandma lurky?:
Try to read the prescribing information completely and stop cherry-picking sentences out of context and eliminating the placebo-arm of the studies.
Why do you hate kids so much, lurky? Why do you want kids to acquire vaccine-preventable diseases, grandma? You are a pathetic excuse for a human being.
As usual Anne Dachel did a drive by on a LA times article about autism. She dropped these two. I am trying to read them but I am new to this compared to you all. Is anyone familiar with these.
"Infant mortality rates regressed against number of vaccine doses routinely given: Is there a biochemical or synergistic toxicity?
Do aluminum vaccine adjuvants contribute to the rising prevalence of autism?
I also found someone posting the HFCS autism link in the same comment section. The woo flows fast. There is now a website about it. Siggghhh.
Both T&S and Miller have been covered here before.
OK, I will try plugging in search terms and see what I can find. Thanks.
Found it. Fascinating. The quality of science Anne Dachel uses is truly bargain basement,
Rotateq safety reassurances from Merck
"No safety or efficacy data are available from clinical trials regarding the administration of RotaTeq to infants who are potentially immunocompromised.
No safety or efficacy data are available for administration of RotaTeq to infants with a history of gastrointestinal disorders."
"In post-marketing experience, intussusception (including death) and Kawasaki disease have been reported in infants who have received RotaTeq."
lurker, what school district in California requires rotavirus vaccine?
@Chris@296-What school district in CA requires tuna salad?
Rotateq is not required, but it is certainly responsible for saving many lives. So why don't you give us a presentation on the reliable numbers of injuries vs morbidity and mortality? Citations please.
@Killy-Ask Merck since they put that on their website.
Lurky: still missing that vital reading comprehension component, aren't you? It really is quite over your head that the links you posted don't prove what you are hinting they do.
Repeating yourself only shows that you are 2x as dumb. Or possibly 2x as dishonest, I'm not sure which.
"Results During the study period, 786 725 total RV5 doses, which included 309 844 first doses, were administered. We did not observe a statistically significant increased risk of intussusception with RV5 for either comparison group following any dose in either the 1- to 7-day or 1- to 30-day risk window. For the 1- to 30-day window following all RV5 doses, we observed 21 cases of intussusception compared with 20.9 expected cases (SIR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.62-1.54); following dose 1, we observed 7 cases compared with 5.7 expected cases (SIR, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.5-2.54). For the 1- to 7-day window following all RV5 doses, we observed 4 cases compared with 4.3 expected cases (SIR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.25-2.36); for dose 1, we observed 1 case compared with 0.8 expected case (SIR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.03-6.75). The upper 95% CI limit of the SIR (6.75) from the historical comparison translates to an upper limit for the attributable risk of 1 intussusception case per 65 287 RV5 dose-1 recipients.
Conclusion Among US infants aged 4 to 34 weeks who received RV5, the risk of intussusception was not increased compared with infants who did not receive the rotavirus vaccine."
Lurker, tuna salad is not covered by California bill AB2109. So what school district in California deviates from the state vaccine requirements for school attendance by including rotavirus vaccination?
@Shay- I am posting this for possible lurkers who lurked like me and who at one time would think anyone questioning vaccines are crazy. Then I started reading -This is Merck's website - I'll take their word for it- "Vaccinator beware"
I am addressing this to you "Are you a high functioning autistic because your comments lead me to believe you are."
"The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approvedExternal Web Site Icon a label for RotaTeq Â®, a rotavirus vaccine manufactured by Merck and Co., Inc, to include information on reports of Kawasaki syndrome occurring before and after the vaccine's licensure in February 2006. FDA has not made any changes to its indications for use of RotaTeq nor has it issued new or revised warnings or precautions. Likewise, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has not made any changes in its recommendations regarding the use of RotaTeq. Healthcare providers and parents should remain confident in using RotaTeq in infants.
The FDA reports that five cases of Kawasaki syndrome have been identified in children less that 1 year of age who received the RotaTeq vaccine during clinical trials conducted before the vaccine was licensed. Three reports of Kawasaki syndrome were detected following the vaccine's approval in February 2006 through routine monitoring using the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). After learning about these Kawasaki syndrome reports, CDC identified one additional unconfirmed case through its Vaccine Safety Datalink project. The vaccine label has been revised to notify healthcare providers and the public about the reports of Kawasaki syndrome following RotaTeq vaccination.
The number of Kawasaki syndrome reports does not exceed the number of cases we expect to see based on the usual occurrence of Kawasaki syndrome in children. There is no known cause-and-effect relationship between receiving RotaTeq or any other vaccine and the occurrence of Kawasaki syndrome."
71,725 infants total, participated in 3 placebo-controlled trials. A total of 36,125 infants received Rotateq vaccine. A total of 35,560 infants received the placebo....
Across the clinical studies, 52 deaths were reported. There were 25 deaths in the Rotateq recipients compared to 27 deaths in the placebo recipients. The most commonly reported cause of death was sudden infant death syndrome, which was observed in 8 recipients of Rotateq and 9 placebo recipients."
Lurky -- your Merck links do not mean what you claim they mean.
You seem to think that "autistic" is an insult -- why?
(and personally, I find it hard to believe that you can function at all, given your demonstrated inability to understand written English).
I posted the last three links for any poster who has read grandma lurky's cherry-picked sentences.
Does grandma lurky believe that a "report" of an adverse effect or death is confimatory?
Why does grandma lurky hate babies?
Why does grandma lurky want to see infants hospitalized and die from rotavirus?
And there goes any remaining shred of being able to pretend at being anything other than deranged. On the off chance that anyone hasn't run into it before, the "no safety or efficacy data are available" routine is isomorphic to the "Pregnancy Category C" (or B, take your pick) gambit, which collapses so promptly that it's amazing anyone even bothers.
We don't want your quotations lifted right off the NVIC, AoA...or any other anti-vaccine websites, grandma lurky.
Now say good night, like a good little troll.
Quite a few people are referring to vaccinations as immunization which is incorrect.
There is quite a bit of emotion in the arguments.
The health of American children has been declining and the second cause of death now in children is cancer. I believe the current recommended number of childhod vaccinations in the US is 68. Both viewpoints cannot be correct. Seek facts as best you can in this difficult area.
Please help me out here. Do you mean by stating that these two "viewpoints cannot be correct" that the premises that (1) "the health of American children has been declining and the second cause of death now in children is cancer" and (2) that you believe that "the recommended number of childhood vaccinations in the US is 68" are mutually exclusive?
It seems to me that, contrary to your statement, both premises could be correct. Of course, it's also true that neither of your premises could be correct. And, of course, it's also true that (wait for it) even if both of your premises are true, they could be completely unrelated.
Really, what is it that you meant? (You might have your reply checked by a sentient being before posting it here. Just sayin'.)
Vaccination is one form of immunization, so it is in fact correct to refer to vaccination as immunization. If you are attempting some moronic argument in the form of "vaccinations do not always succeed at creating immunity, therefore it's not immunization," then give it up; we refer to CPR as a life-saving measure and no one claims we must stop because the survival rate with CPR is not 100%.
Fwah?? Even if your BS figure of 68 vaccinations was true, which it isn't, how would that in any way affect or be affected by the second leading cause of death in the US being cancer? Are you, possibly, trying to put together some idiotic argument along the lines of "we should wait until infectious disease goes back to being the number one killer of children before we do anything about it"? If so, you're a creep.
Well, I suppose we could allow infectious disease to come back so,that cancer ceases to be the second most common cause of death in children.... But most of us prefer NOT to have several children die or have long term effects from diseases that vaccines protect against.
Mark's material sounds remarkably similar to that which I survey:
The first sentence sounds as if it were lifted intact from an article @ the Progressive Radio Network/ Gary Null.com, while the end paragraph has a whiff of Canary Party/ Age of Autism/ Thinking Moms' Revolution about it.
At any rate, there isn't much material but it's recycled endlessly.
A survey found about 70% of U.S. adults had antibody to PCVs. What's your point? Antibodies to many different antigens can be found, doesn't mean that there was infection.
@ Mark Landes:
"Quite a few people are referring to vaccinations as immunization which is incorrect."
You know you are quite daft...Immunizations/vaccinations are used interchangeably in the medical field.
"The health of American children has been declining and the second cause of death now in children is cancer."
How has the "health of American children been declining"?
How about some specifics and some proof about your statement?
Perhaps you would like to look at the leading causes of deaths in various age groups, before you make a blanket statement like that, Mark.
I tried to tell lurker that but she's moronic troll so she doesn't read or know anything about that.
I am not anti vaccine. My children have been vaccinated. My youngest had a terrible reaction to a vaccine when she went for her kindergarten boosters. There is irreparable damage. Her pediatrician at the time wrote in her medical chart that she was not to have another injection. That doctor has since retired. Six different pediatricians since then have called it everything from coincidence to malarkey. If my child has another booster, she could have an anaphylactic reaction or suffer even more damage. Since she has been allergy tested for all the common issues and found not allergic to any, new peds won't treat her based on my decision to protect her. She has never been tested for allergy to the actual vaccine ingredients though. Many, not all, parents that don't vaccinate don't because their kids are the small percentage that reacted to a vaccine or their sibling has had a bad reaction. Since common belief is that vaccines are completely safe for all people, despite the Supreme Court Rulling that vaccines are "unavoidable unsafe", this law is dangerous for kids like mine. Fine, make it so I have to sit and listen to a doctor explain the pros and cons to vaccination as I have already heard through every well baby/child visit for the past 19 years, but, once the info is given make it so the doctor then can not refuse to sign.
As far as Dr Sears saying that all those 'doctors' that walked up to the mic and proclaimed they would sign being an orchestrated event, unfortunately it was apparently true. I was there in the seats waiting to tell my daughters story. As they were standing in line several of them were telling the others to make sure they said they should sign the forms as they were all giggling and laughing. As the 'doctors' that finished saying just that at the mic walked to the back of the room they passed their white lab coats off to others in line. From where I was sitting, watching and listening, Sears speaks the truth. There is not video proof because the court officers would not allow us to video tape. I tried and was threatened to have my phone taken away. Dr Sears is not anti vaccine either. Ask his patients, he vaccinates their children. But he is for protecting children like mine who need protecting. The way insurance works though, you have to go where you are covered or pay out of pocket. Some parents can't afford to do that but it doesn't make their child any less valuable than the kid next door that can receive all their vaccines without incident. I say 'doctors' because most of them were med students that came over from the convention across the street. In my personal experience, most doctors will not sign these waivers and most will not conclude that a vaccine can cause harm even if they see it and can't explain it any other way. Medicine of any kind is not one size fits all.
The CDC vaccine schedule is recommended not mandated and if the CDC determines there is a threat to the public there are already laws in place to make them mandatory. This law is redundant as parents are bombarded with vaccine info at doctor visits, schools, tv commercials, internet ads, etc. When we sign the current waivers you are signing that you understand the dangers and know that your child will be excluded from school in case of an outbreak. The population of so called 'lazy parents' that use waivers 'because it's easier' very untrue unless their kid is not going to the doctor at all. Making medical care more accessible to families is coming closer day by day. This bill iis redundant as the assembly committee chair so wonderfully pointed out.
"Since she has been allergy tested for all the common issues and found not allergic to any, new peds won't treat her based on my decision not to protect her."
It was supposed to say to protect her but you can conclude that on your own if you actually read it.
I am glad your children have been vaccinated. Mine were too.
I am curious, though.
What was the "terrible reaction" your youngest had?
Which vaccine was it?
What is the "irreparable damage"?
Did you file a VAERS report?
Did you file for compensation under the NVICP?
Most of the commenters on this blog prefer to base their decisions not on the "common belief", which is often based on incorrect or outdated information. We prefer the best available scientific evidence. And we do not claim that vaccines are absolutely safe with no side effects whatsoever. That is why we have the NVICP.
But, vaccines are much, much safer than the diseases they protect against.
What evidence does Dr Sears have to support his recommendation to delay vaccinating against some diseases thereby increasing the period in which children are susceptible to them and making it more likely his patients will suffer the diseases and their side effects?
And, for illustration, suppose the doctors did get an email and decided to show up and testify.
I get an email almost every day asking me to sign some petition or other. A few of them I have decided I agree with and signed. Most of them I ignore. Some of them I actively disagree with, but there is no "I disagree" petition for me to sign.
Does that make my choice to sign a particular petition an "orchestrated event"?
Where and when was this? And was there not a court stenographer recording the official transcript?
You'll forgive me, I'm sure, for not taking your word for it, even working from the presumption that you sincerely believe the above. Evidence, please.
I presume the reference is to the very committee hearing linked to in the main article. As in, with video. Of course, this wouldn't document the sinister tittering and lab-coat exchange in the back of the room. Now, the link itself doesn't do anything for me other than claim "the requested video is still processing" and urge me to install Silverlight, but it would kind of suck if there weren't in fact a parade of people wearing lab coats for no particular reason.
Squirrelelite. My daughter was given dtap, ipv, mmr, varicella, and the flu shots at the same time. So, no, I have no idea which one she reacted to. Could have been one or could have been a combo but you can be sure as rain she will never get another shot, ever! No it wasn't reported to VAERS. I had no idea it even existed and doctors don't freely give out that info. It's also not mandatory that doctors report it to VAERS and many won't take the time to do so. It's been written in her medical records and that should be enough for other doctors but no it isn't. Her reaction? Body covered in hives, high fever, convulsions, lethargy. The irreparable damage? The incredible amount of language she had dropped from huge paragraphs that would make adults stop and say wow, she's really bright dropped down to 2 and 3 word sentences. She is ten and not caught up to were she was at age 5. She now has severe sensory issues: sound and lights bother her to extreme distraction. She has reactive airway disease. Gets hives for no reason. Has a permenent rash on her chest that started the week of the vaccines and has been treated with several different types of meds, creams, herbicides, antifungals, steroids, antibiotics, ect. It never goes away, years later still there. Her IQ has dropped from 145 to 80. Yes she was tested because the school thought she was gifted in their preschool program. She was tested again in first grade, same test and same psychologist. Her anxiety is disabling. She is no longer able to be in a mainstream classroom and play with peers her own age. She is always sick with strep. She is now a carrier and it flares up everytime she picks up a cold from someone else's kid. We have suffered along with her over the years. Before she had this set of shots she was perfectly happy and healthy kid. I can look back at my journals and see that other times she was vaccinated she was more sick than she should have been but the doctors kept dismissing it. Oh it's coincidence. She must have picked up something else when she was here. She was already sick she just wasn't showing signs yet. Some kids react differently than others it will be fine. All of the above started between the day of the vaccine or within the next 4 weeks. If even one of her peds would have taken the time to listen to my concerns maybe today she would still be the happy, healthy, bright child she was. I am not risking more damage or even death because some pediatrician turned politician has decided that I am not smart enought to make those decisions for my child just 6 months after he passed a bill giving 12 year olds the right to make their own decisions. This bill is a patient rights issue. Once this passes and becomes law, what is to stop this man or others from passing more laws forcing other medicine or medical procedures on us. Informed consent means you know ALL the risks and the benefits and you make a choice based on that information, the patient's medical history and the patient's family medical history. No one should need permission for that.
Go to the FDA website and read the data sheets on these vaccines. Most of these reactions are never told to you by a doctor. The Dtap vaccine in particular is a good read especially the part about after market reactions. It's from the FDA so it must be full of scientific evidence.
I can't answer personal questions about Dr Sears as I am not him and have never talked to him. I have read his book and listened to what he had to say. I respect him for caring when so many doctors don't.
The hearing started at 1:30. The CMA photo shoot on the steps of the capital started at 1. If you watch the video of the hearing itself, you will hear the testimony offered and they will say out loud that they were med student, interns, and residents. Only a few of them claimed to be real licensed doctors. Easy to look up on your own. If you can't watch the original video it has been posted on YouTube.
Also, if you want evidence that doctors won't sign these waivers all you need to do is call around to pediatrician offices and claim to be a parent that does not believe in vaccines and see how well you are responded to. Don't take my word for it. Or the thousands of other families that are going through the same situations as I am. Call and get the facts yourself.
Take the word vaccine out of the bill and add in any other medicine or medical procedure that you have said no to or were able to chose from and think how you would like it if you had to get permission. Especially if there was no guarantee that you could find a doctor that would be willing to allow you to make that choice. If this bill passes, it will open that door. But don't take my word for it, wait and see for yourself.
Julie: I may be reading into your statement, but you seem to think it's some kind of conspiracy that doctors won't sign waivers. Well, good for them. They shouldn't.
More and more pediatricians are refusing to take new patients if their parents won't allow vaccinations. Why would any responsible MD (which leaves Bob Sears out) sign a waiver permitting parents to opt out of the best possible way to protect a child from disease?
You sincerely believe, and it would be impossible to shake your belief, that your daughter was "damaged" by a vaccine. This conviction, however, is not supported by the evidence.
Interesting. How long ago did this happen? I have always received vaccine information sheets, and my youngest is eighteen years old. This says:
And if you look at a VIS (Vaccine Information Sheet) for DTaP it says:
It also mentions that you can report to VAERS:
I definitely sympathize with you raising a child with all those health problems. I had trouble enough raising four children who, mostly, were healthy.
I especially sympathize with your daughter's problem with convulsions. From your description, it sounds like your daughter was about 4-5 when her health problems started. That would be about the right age for the fourth vaccination for most of the vaccines you listed. That is also the age my sister was when she developed a seizure disorder. (convulsions) She took medicine for her seizures all through high school. Fortunately, she was able to go off the medicine without convulsions recurring. I wasn't quite so lucky and will be taking medication to control seizures for the rest of my life.
I went to this site for information:
I didn't see strep listed as a side effect of any vaccine. Strep is a bacterial infection that is almost always cleared up with treatment by antibiotics. Sometimes a round of a different antibiotic may be needed. Does your daughter still test positive on throat cultures?
I also looked up hives. They were described as an allergic reaction. If your daughter still has hives, I suggest asking for a referral to an allergy specialist to pin down the source if it doesn't show up on a broad spectrum screening.
Severe allergic reactions to vaccines are extremely rare. Several sheets mentioned they occur from a few minutes to a few hours after the vaccine. I remember sitting with my kids in the waiting room for 15 minutes after each vaccination just in case. The kids always wanted to get out of there right away.
The information about the DTaP vaccine also mentioned this:
In some of my searches, I found links to information about reporting adverse reactions.
VAERS and the NVICP have been in place for 22 years now. I'm surprised no one suggested you make a VAERS report.
If your child had a severe fever leading to encephalitis, convulsions, and brain damage, I am sorry for you and your daughter. However, these same effects occur much more often with people who actually get the disease(s) like my sister and I did. (We were lucky and didn't have persistent side effects.)
This law is a patient's rights issue. The patient (or the person making choices for them) has the right to complete and accurate information about the risks and benefits of both choices, to vaccinate and to get the actual disease. This law is about making sure it isn't easier to just say no than it is to get that information.
If passed, it will be approved by both houses of the California legislature and signed by the governor. It cannot just be declared by fiat of one pediatrician turned politician.
The current vaccine schedule is supported by a multitude of safety studies and long term monitoring such as through VAERS and other reporting systems. Dr Sears encourages people to stay vulnerable longer or indefinitely without any evidence to support that being a safer choice.
By the way, Julie, if your child has a condition that prevents vaccination, then you should be pressuring your legislators to pass this bill. If she cannot be vaccinated, she will need to be protected by herd immunity. You want as many parents as possible getting their kids vaccinated, plus getting themselves the Tdap vaccine.
Because my son had neonatal seizures (yes, seizures occur even without being vaccinated) he was denied protection from pertussis. So he only had the DT vaccine, at a time when our county was having a pertussis epidemic (and we are having another pertussis epidemic, fortunately he did get a Tdap a couple of years ago).
[sarcasm] Thanks Barbara Loe Fisher! [/sarcasm]
I always asked about the vaccine status of the children at every mom/baby group I went to as a new mom. I only encountered one that had a parent who was proud of not vaccinating, so I never went there again.
And I am very surprised that you never saw a Vaccine Information Sheet, even though they are required by federal law. That law was the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act that was enacted in 1986.
So squirrelelite and Shay, do you think my child should continue to be vaccinated until her death and that will serve what purpose? Again, if your child is vaccinated the fact that mine can't be won't matter because yours is immune. Should we line up all the kids with cancer and vaccinate them as well, even though they can't be, just because you feel there should be zero exceptions? And she doesn't just have hives, they come and go because her immune system has been compromised. The rash she has had for years looks exactly like chicken pox and is so far incurable. Oh and those wonderful VIS sheets don't list all reactions:
From a the dtap vaccine insert, published by the FDA: page 11. Adverse events reported during post-approval use of Tripedia vaccine include idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura, SIDS, anaphylactic reaction, cellulitis, autism, convulsion/grand mal convulsion, encephalopathy, hypotonia, neuropathy, somnolence and apnea. Events were included in this list because of the seriousness or frequency of reporting. Because these events are reported voluntarily from a population of uncertain size, it is not always possible to reliably estimate their frequencies or to establish a causal relationship to components of Tripedia vaccine.2.
Notice it says 'post approval' meaning not reported by the manufacturer but by doctors after the fact.
Oh, maybe the FDA is lying. I would trust VAERS if doctors were required to report reactions or suspected reactions. A child doesn't suffer brain damage without an accident or incident at the exact time they have a reaction to a vaccine and it not be related. A child's immune system doesn't suddenly become compromised for no reason. A child's sensory system doesn't just become super sensitive for no reason. And for all that to happen at the same time, coincidence. I am leaving this discussion. There should be allowed exceptions for kids that are ill. Not all meds are good for all people and every person has value.
This is an inherently fraudulent position, and you damn well know it.
Now, moreover, the Sacramento Convention Center is not "across the street" from the capitol in any common sense of the word. It's not all that far, but the extravagence of your tale so far suggests embroidery.
For example, you offer
The link is merely an announcement of the "Legislative Leadership Conference." But then one gets the second two sentences, which don't exactly follow, and a bland suggestion that "Easy to look up on your own. If you can't watch the original video it has been posted on YouTube." Watch *what*? The hearings? The "photo shoot"? The Snidely Whiplash performance that you assert?
Chris, I didn't read the sheets because getting the vaccines were never a question. I had 4 kids in 8 years and 2 of them had autism. When my youngest daughter was an infant I was busy trying to keep my boys from running down the hall all while my oldest held the baby while she was getting her shots. I read them when my oldest was born but really don't remember reading about VAERS. I only heard about them when I switched insurance and medical groups but the ped said it was too late to report it. She's retired too now.
My oldest son was a premie and his vaccines were delayed until he was 5 months old, he got pertussis from the vaccine and it was the longest 4 months of my life. The only good part is that now is his immune and doesn't need the shot again. His doctor ran a titer test to make sure, yep, he is 17 and still immune. He has had all of his other vaccines. Something that might interest you is that most of the infected kids had pertussis vaccines already. See figure 6 http://www.cdph.ca.gov/programs/immunize/Documents/PertussisReport2011-…
No, I don't believe this bill is ok and won't support it. Government should not have a say in what you put in your body. It just opens the door for abuse. Maybe if the wording were changed but not the way it sits now. When my oldest was 14 she decided she did not want the Gardisil shots. The ped told her she would die of cancer if she were raped, actually screamed it at her. Doctors don't have the right to treat people that way. Most politicians have not gone to medical school and they should leave these issues in the hands of the CDC. There are already federal laws in place that if the CDC really wants to can line up very American and inject them if they feel there is a threat to the public. Let the CDC do their jobs. Good night.
"Chris, I didn't read the sheets because getting the vaccines were never a question. I had 4 kids in 8 years and 2 of them had autism."
Really Julie...Don't you think you should undergo genetic testing to determine why two or three of your children have autism?
"My oldest son was a premie and his vaccines were delayed until he was 5 months old, he got pertussis from the vaccine and it was the longest 4 months of my life. The only good part is that now is his immune and doesn't need the shot again."
I don't think so Julie...the pertussis vaccine is not a live vaccine. Why don't you ask your son's pediatrician to explain the differences between a live attenuated vaccine- such as the MMR vaccine and inactivated whole cell pertussis vaccine-such as the DTP vaccine and acellular pertussis vaccine-such as the DTaP vaccine. You son was exposed to a pertussis case either before he received the vaccine or shortly after receiving pertussis vaccine.
BTW Julie, you say that your daughter has rashes similar to chicken pox vesicles on her chest and also has frequent strep infections. Why haven't you had the rash or the fluid within the vesicles cultured? It sounds to me as though your daughter has bouts of impetigo:
You accuse us of wanting to have kids with cancer immunized thus endangering them; you are clueless about what specific vaccines are contraindicated for people who are immune suppressed or immune-compromised. I think you are selfish by not having your children fully immunized...because of the risks of your unimmunized kids exposing a vulnerable infant or a child who has REAL medical contraindications for certain vaccines.
The ped told her she would die of cancer if she were raped, actually screamed it at her.
My bullshit detector just red-lined.
My bullshit antenna was twitching 12 hours ago, when Julie first posted here.
Of course, this is not the question. The question is what government should say about what is required for admittance to public schools and potentially be putting into the bodies of other people.
The ped told her she would die of cancer if she were raped, actually screamed it at her.
My bullshit detector just red-lined.
Posted by: herr doktor bimler | May 3, 2012 2:09 AM
Dr. Laura Givant
Kaiser Permanente Sacramento Medical Center
Not all doctors are the warm fuzzy happy people you are delusioned into thinking they are.
After reading Julie's litany of horrors, Chris asks @343, "Interesting. How long ago did this happen?"
Julie @340 tells us, "She is ten and not caught up to were she was at age 5." So this happened about five years ago, in 2006 or 2007. Â I'm pretty sure the Internet existed then and that antivaxxers were hard at work. I'm pretty sure ambulance-chasing lawyers were active then too.
Forget VAERS; why wasn't this dramatic case heard in the vaccine court?
Julie tells us @340, "All of the above started between the day of the vaccine or within the next 4 weeks." And despite the fact that she was keeping "journals" of her interactions with doctors, it didn't occur to Julie to contact a lawyer about the grievous harm her child had suffered. Â Not then, nor within the statute of limitations, which is at least a year, so would not have expired by the time the school psychologist determined that her little genius had dropped to subnormal intelligence.
And it also didn't occur to her to go online to see what recourse she had.
And it also didn't occur to her to contact other doctors to discuss this horrific event and what could be done about it.
And it also didn't occur to anyone at the school, not even the school psychologist, to suggest to her that there actually is some recourse in this obvious case of vaccine injury.
Yeah, I believe this.
Really Julie...Don't you think you should undergo genetic testing to determine why two or three of your children have autism?
Um, yeah. Two of my 4 have it and the UC Davis Mind Institute did not find a genetic link. Sorry to burst your bubble.
BTW Julie, you say that your daughter has rashes similar to chicken pox vesicles on her chest and also has frequent strep infections. Why haven't you had the rash or the fluid within the vesicles cultured? It sounds to me as though your daughter has bouts of impetigo:
It's not impetigo. She has been seen by 2 dermatologist who insist it's foliculitis but their medicine does not work.
you are clueless about what specific vaccines are contraindicated for people who are immune suppressed or immune-compromised
Oh really? I know that she can get shots but they must be broken down. Like the dtap can be given individually instead of the combo shot. Unless you live here, then the pertussis is the only part you can't get separately. She can't have the mmr shot or any live vaccines. But since I have no idea which one of the shots she received that day or which combo caused all of this mess, we are not taking our chances.
My goodness, Julie sure likes her straw man arguments, doesn't she?
No, Julie, we don't think that vaccinating children with actual, real medical contraindications for vaccination is a good idea. But we also don't think that withholding the protection of vaccination from a child, based on the guesswork of a parent who's so clueless about vaccines she thinks that you can get pertussis from a vaccine with no live pertussis cells and that unvaccinated children pose no danger to vaccinated children. Guesswork? Yes, because that's exactly what you admitted that it was. You claimed that there was no way the vaccines could not have been the causative agent for your daughter's autism, but if you really believe that, it just means you're as ill-informed about basic probability as you are about immunology.
@ Antaeus Feldspar: I feel the same way. At first, when I read Julie's initial post, I thought, "Wow. A person with a real vaccine reaction. I wonder how it's listed in VAERs, since her pediatrician documented it." Then I read further and she writes how other (new) pediatricians are pushing her to immunize the child. Really? Really? After a severe reaction?
Then she posts further, and the messages get more garbled. I don't, perhaps, doubt that her daughter had a severe reaction. But Julie's lack of research - in THIS day and age? - and lack of VAERs report AND lack of any other documentation besides her say so (and I don't mean here, because I'm perfectly OK with her not giving too many details on a blog)
THEN, Julie has the gall to post her son got PERTUSSIS from the VACCINE??????? What part of "acellular" doesn't she understand? There are no active, living pertussis cells in the vaccine, and last thing I knew, there are no zombie pertussis cells in vaccines, either.
If she has 3 children with issues, I can imagine the stress and frustration. But I can't accept the lying, even to strangers on the internet.
Perhaps you did, but did not understand them. From how your story had panned out, along with the writing style, I suspect a strong genetic component.
I do confess missing how old her daughter was due to getting cross eyed trying to read the wall of text. It makes it more baffling why she did not hear of VAERS and the vaccine court five years ago when the whole thing was very big in autism circles.
And I still don't understand why she is not lobbying strongly for the bill if she has a child with a legitimate reason to avoid vaccines. If it is all true her child needs better herd immunity.
Gah! Missing words and bad grammar, I need more coffee.
But I need to go wake up my youngest, and hope she does not miss the bus again. I do remember seeing the vaccine information sheets when she was an infant sometime in the last century, when I had two little boys running around. That was about the time the five year old was in intensive speech therapy and special ed. preschool, and the younger one was being diagnosed with dysphasia.
Oh, and I also remember when she was six months old and got chicken pox (a year before the vaccine was available in the USA). Which also happened to her brothers, about the time I was taking the boys to a combined total of five speech/language therapy sessions per week. Lots of fun.
(fortunately the younger boy got caught up, the older one still has issues, and had some more speech therapy sessions earlier this year after his complex migraine was mistaken for a stroke)
Julie, you need to work on your story.
"Um, yeah. Two of my 4 have it (autism) and the UC Davis Mind Institute did not find a genetic link. Sorry to burst your bubble."
Julie you said you had two children diagnosed with autism before your daughter was "injured" by vaccines. (2+1=3)
"It's not impetigo. She has been seen by 2 dermatologist who insist it's foliculitis but their medicine does not work."
You do know, don't you, that folliculitis is an inflamation of the hair follicles and not caused by a delayed reaction to vaccines?:
"Oh really? I know that she can get shots but they must be broken down. Like the dtap can be given individually instead of the combo shot. Unless you live here, then the pertussis is the only part you can't get separately. She can't have the mmr shot or any live vaccines. But since I have no idea which one of the shots she received that day or which combo caused all of this mess, we are not taking our chances."
Oh really Julie. Do tell us about your source for single antigen diphtheria vaccine. And, tell us what your children's doctor told you about administering tetanus toxoid.
So what? The genetics for autism are scattered and still being studied. It is very complicated, and could be several different things that are scattered.
My oldest, along with the seizures and speech thing, has a severe genetic heart condition that involves a thickening of a heart muscle that can be seen with an echocardiogram. This is not a diagnosis by behavior, but by actually seeing the abnormal anatomy. He also had genetic testing for this condition.
There are eighteen known gene sequences that account for 80% of those who have this condition, and does not have any of them. He is among the 20% where the genetic sequence is unknown.
I am not surprised that you can claim that the genetic testing did not find anything. Except, it doesn't mean anything and it certainly does not prove that vaccines have anything to do with autism.
I notice you had a hard time following through on this, Julie.
By the way, naming a doctor is not, in and of itself, sufficient to demonstrate that she yelled at your daughter about getting cancer from being raped. All the more so since it it would be a violation of doctor-patient confidentiality for the doctor to say anything about the matter.
Suffice to say, you can say anything you want and the pediatrician you are accusing of shouting nonsense at your daughter can't set the record straight. How convenient...
Hereâs whatâs bugging me about your (and Iâm using âyouâ in the general sense, not specifically you at the moment) opposition to this bill.
This bill isnât about forcing compulsory immunizations.
This bill is about making sure parents are informed when they are trying to decide whether or not to opt out.
California law as currently written makes it ridiculously easy to obtain an exemption. In my opinion, the currently law makes a mockery of the idea that immunizations are required to attend school. And the law extends protection for vaccine avoiders at all schools, including private schools and daycares. Those of us who would prefer schools in which measles or pertussis would not spread into an outbreak do not have that option.
And now specifically for you, Julie: youâve complained in the comments on this thread about how you feel that you were not well informed before your own children were vaccinated, and that you paid no attention to the VIS sheets, and you had no idea that there was such a things as VAERS.
Do you not see the irony in your opposing this bill all the while complaining that you were not informed?
Do you think you could drop the talking points long enough to see whatâs really going on here? This bill helps people like you.
By the way, I never said my daughter had autism. She doesn't. Her diagnosis is aquired brain injury. I also did not say autism was caused by vaccines. Why I am against this bill is that doctors lie about vaccine safety. They are not 100% safe for 100% of everyone and when there is a reaction some still won't admit to it. I read those VIS sheets when my oldest was born and the doctors told me reactions were unheard of. So I believed them. I might have seen the VAERS information in them but probably dismissed it as unneeded information back then. I believed the doctors telling me they were perfectly safe. My oldest son with autism has autism because of a birth injury. The blood flow through the umbilical cord was cut off during delivery and the doctors had to revive him. Maybe he didn't get pertussis from the shot but he got it despite the shot. He was not around anyone that was sick at that time. RSV was all over town and his first ped assumed my son had that. When he got pneumonia after a couple weeks of treatment I took him to the er and the doctor there did a nasal swab, which ruled out RSV, and a blood test that showed it was pertussis. Because of the RSV outbreak, I kept my kids inside and away from other people so my assumption back then was that he got it from the shot but it does not matter now, he has his immunity to it.
When my daughter had her kindergarten vaccines I was working 45 hours a week, trying to take care of 4 kids, both my boys had autism, one moderate and one mild. My husband and I worked opposite shifts so our kids wouldn't be bounced around in daycare. I was not connected to the autism community back then. I wasn't aware it was a requirement. I did not have time for Internet or anything that my kids didn't have to have. The er notes document her reaction and the ped she had documented the loss in developement. We moved and that ped has since retired but every ped we have had since then insists it was something else. It could not have been the shot. Shots are perfectly safe. I too believed this until I saw her reaction. I have been bullied by doctors over this issue. The only doctor since then that actually has listened long enough to actually read her chart and er notes is a neurologist, not a ped. He agrees it's not worth the risk for her. When doctors won't admit these things can happen or even deny what is written in a medical record, that becomes a danger for the small percent that is affected.
Why it was never reported to VAERS? Because I didn't remember they existed and the doctor never mentioned it. On top of the fact that I was grieving for my child and the loss of her quality of life. I have found several moms that have kids with nearly identical reactions as my daughter and their cases weren't reported either. They should do a study, backed by medical records, on how many kids had reactions that were never reported. I would love to see those numbers.
As for my atrocious writing somehow being linked to autism, maybe you are right. I am using an itouch and watching my kids play at the same time. The frequent interruptions and resulting lost train of thought mixed with a tiny little screen; I guess that puts me on the spectrum too. I'll mention it to my doctor next time I see her.
BTW, if the rash were truly foliculitis, it would have responded to anti bacterial or anti fungal treatments.
Say what you will but only a mom that has seen their child go through something like that and see the instant change in their child could understand the pain that radiates through every ounce of your being. There are no words that can describe the pain. Making fun of me and mocking me because you've not walked in my shoes or have seen what I have seen, go ahead if it makes you feel better. I pray you never have to.
It's too bad that there's not a device with 12 buttons on it that you could use to find this out.
No one here is claiming they are 100% safe for 100% of everyone. The risks associated with immunization are well understood and while serious complications are extraordinarily rare, such that any risk associated with immunization is orders of magnitude less than the risk associated with remaining vulnerable to infection, there are individuals who for legitimate health concerns are not good candidates to receive scheduled routine immunizations.
And you know what? The immunization schedule recognizes this and recommends they not be immunized.
Of course, this means that they have to rely heavily on herd immunity to reduce their risk of becoming infected, which makes it critically important that as amny people as possible who are suitable candidates get vaccinated.
Only a parent, you mean--it isn't any easier for a dad. That said, the fact that you're feeling pain doesn't argue AB 2109 is a bad bill.
you will hear the testimony offered and they will say out loud that they were med student, interns, and residents. Only a few of them claimed to be real licensed doctors.
Interns and residents are licensed doctors. They've graduated from medical school with MD's; this is their training period.
So this is where I get confused. Julie's story, taken for what is there, is tragic (I hear you all and I am just saying this is what she believes). What does she hope to accomplish here? She says she is against this bill because she wasn't informed. I guess she wants everyone else to remain uninformed. Now that she notices that no one is kowtowing to her pity me poor mom routine, why does she still persist? Does anyone know why some of these posters continue to post even after it is clear that most of us aren't being swayed?
Some anti-vaccination nutjobs insist that negative events that happen weeks or even months after vaccination must have been caused by said vaccinations. Some so called "reactions" can't possibly be caused by vaccination, yet people insist that they were.
If I had a child who was grievously injured by doctors who deliberately lied to me about the risk, I believe I could somehow in the course of the next year find five minutes to look in the yellow pages for the biggest lawyer ad and call to make an appointment. Perhaps my lunch break at work would be long enough. And this would be especially true if this grievously injured child were in addition to two other special-needs children, because any recovery for her would allow me to provide more for her without depriving the others.
But somehow, despite her carefully documenting each doctor visit in her journals, that thought never occurred to Julie.
Cry me a river, Julie. You missed that several of us have kids with autism or other health issues. You obviously missed that my son had a seizure disorder, plus a severe heart disorder which was the reason for his last two trips by ambulance.
On each well child check up I would be given a sheet of paper with my child's weight, height, vaccines given, etc. And, of course, I was given a booklet that is the "official state immunization record" that was updated with each visit. Plus a sheet of paper with what to expect for a normally developing child (which is how my first son got referred to a neurologist and neurodevelopmental therapy).
So now you want to make sure that parents are not properly informed before denying a child vaccines just because you failed to read what was given to you. Nice.
And you still don't get that if your daughter really cannot receive any more vaccines, then she needs more people to be vaccinated. Hey! You can help, Julie, make sure you and your husband get a Tdap vaccine.
If I had a child who was grievously injured by doctors who deliberately lied to me about the risk, I believe I could somehow in the course of the next year find five minutes to look in the yellow pages for the biggest lawyer ad and call to make an appointment.
I hope Julie has better luck with her complaint to the medical board about the pediatrician who shouts at patients about how they are going to be raped.
My childhood chum died from polio 60 years ago, before the Salk vaccine was licensed and my cousin was left with life-long neurological sequelae because of measles encephalitis.
I actually worked as public health nurse, investigating cases of vaccine-preventable diseases. I recall a case of an infant who contracted pertussis from a close relative and the infant succumbed to the disease. Long before the Hib and Prevnar vaccines were licensed, young children were "damaged" and died as a result of infections with these invasive bacterial diseases. Look carefully at the infant with a gangrenous hand. Her lower arm was amputated, just after the picture was taken:
Every last one of your "arguments" against vaccines, I have heard before...they are the "talking points" promulgated by the notorious anti-vaccine websites.
And Julie, I have "walked in your shoes". My son was born with a rare genetic disorder which left him multiply disabled with spastic cerebral palsy and within the profound range of mental retardation. He was also immmunodeficient and had pancytopenia that caused multiple internal bleeding episodes. His grand mal seizure disorder was only partially controlled with an arsenal of anti-convulsant medications...and he also had pronounced autistic behaviors.
You do realize, don't you, that your uninformed decisions about not immunizing your children put them at great risk. How do you you justify putting vulnerable children at risk, who actually have REAL medical contraindications for receiving certain vaccines?
So squirrelelite and Shay, do you think my child should continue to be vaccinated until her death and that will serve what purpose?
Well, I'm 56 and I'm still getting vaccinated(seasonal flu comes to mind immediately). And I expect to keep on getting vaccinated, as necessary, until my death.
The purpose of course being that I reach that mark a lot later than I would if I were unprotected by vaccines.
I'm going to play devil's advocate for a moment here. Taking Julie at her word, that her daughter *did* experience a severe reaction to the vaccine series at her pre-K visit. Her child who reacted probably should not be vaccinated, or should be vaccinated with great caution.
However, in that case she *should* be for this bill, pushing for informed consent before one declines a vaccine. After all, if I went to my doctor and he/she told me "vaccines are 100% safe and/or effective" I wouldn't stay there, since NOTHING in the world is 100% safe or effective.
But then, I would also expect him/her to tell me I was full of it if I claimed that my chronic strep, folliculitis (and has it occured to her that maybe those two are connected), and reactive airway disease are from vaccines.
I can't imagine ANY physician yelling about the Gardasil injection. While it's recommended, it's not, as far as I am aware, required anywhere.
As for other adult vaccines - I'm up to date with mine, as are my children. They both had the meningitis vaccine prior to college, for which I was devoutly grateful, since there was a major outbreak at one of their colleges, and several children, who had declined the vaccine, were extremely ill, though, to my recollection, none of them died.
(a bit) O/T. I'm listening to local network news and this death of a young lab tech at a V.A. Hospital has been reported:
I recall a case of meningicoccal meningitis that was reported to the health department where I worked. A thirteen year old boy arrived at the hospital at 6 AM on a Saturday morning. His symptoms were sudden onset of headaches and decreased level of consciousness. He was intubated and put on a respirator; IV Rocephen was started immediately. Twelve hours later he was declared brain dead and life support was removed.
All you pediatricians here worshiping at the alter of vaccines are only trying to assuage your consciences for damaging a generation of American children. We all know that even if you questioned vaccines, you have not choice but to force them on your trusting patients. What happened to oral polio vaccines and pounds of antibiotics for ear infections? Oh, you were wrong on those - a medical g-d made a mistake? Impossible!
Damn the evidence - he who pays for clinical trials gets the results they want. Don't mind studies from Cochrane Collaboration showing mercury filled vax to be ineffective and unsafe.
Never mind that the majority of kids in Cali coming down with have already been vaccinated:
"In California, pertussis rates are about the same in counties with high childhood vaccination rates and low ones. And the C.D.C. reports that pertussis immunization rates have been stable or increasing since 1992."
"A 2012 study led by Dr. David Witt, an infectious disease specialist at the San Rafael, California Kaiser Permanente Medical Center concluded that whooping cough occurs more among vaccinated children than children not vaccinated."
Finally, if any of you smug big-shots are actually scientists, then you know our current understanding of the human immune system is flawed at best. Remember Synergen?
Do you naively believe that doctors and pharma are altruistic angels and money has NOTHING to do with vax policy or medicine in general. Forget vaccines generate $17 billion/yr and are growing fast.
Go ahead and start with the name calling, cause the science ain't on your side...
I see no value in comprehensively rebutting your BS myself, but I will comment on two things:
On polio vaccines: My understanding is that North American jurisdictions made the switch from OPV to IPV on account of the regional elimination of polio, at which point the cost/benefit profile of IPV was clearly favourable. You'll note that OPV is still used in areas where polio is still endemic or where it has only recently been controlled. If by some disaster polio vaccination worldwide crashed and polio again became endemic in North America, I expect OPV would return as the favoured vaccine. There is no worries of medical deities making mistakes, only the rational revision of policy based on evidence.
As for ear infections & antibiotics, if an ear infection is bacterial in origin an antibiotic is entirely appropriate, yes? If it is not, then by applying science-based medicine one would conclude antibiotics are not appropriate. If a patient (or patient's parent) requested antibiotics or a doctor prescribed them in contradiction of such a conclusion, how is that the fault of the scientific process or of researchers who study ear infection etiology?
Perhaps you should link to the Cochrane review itself, since the link you provided does not provide adequate evidence to support either of your contentions.
Citation needed, and no, naturalnews doesn't count as a "citation."
And please, you bring up the old "pharma shill" gambit, you lose the argument automatically.
Damn the evidence--the anti-vax position in a nutshell.
Bill, your claim is demonstrably false. If it were the case, no drug would ever fail clinical testing. The actual numbers, on the other hand, demonstrate only about 20% of all new drugs entities which enter human clinical trials ever make it to market.
So, is that Luke Rudkowski?
And what are the ratios? see:
Pediatrics. 2009 Jun;123(6):1446-51.
Parental refusal of pertussis vaccination is associated with an increased risk of pertussis infection in children.
There is a simple reason why more vaccinated get pertussis: there are more who are vaccinated. Some herd immunity arithmetic:
Take 1000 people (ignoring the infants under 2 months who cannot be vaccinated, or babies under a year who can only be partially vaccinated), if 5% refuse vaccines then the numbers are:
950 vaccinated persons (assuming full schedule)
50 unvaccinated persons
The pertussis vaccine is actually only 80% effective at worse, so the numbers are:
760 protected persons
190 vaccinated but vulnerable persons
50 unvaccinated persons
There is an outbreak and it gets spread to 20% of the population, then:
760 protected persons without pertussis
38 vaccinated persons get pertussis
152 vaccinated person who may still get pertussis
10 unvaccinated persons get pertussis
40 unvaccinated persons who may still get pertussis.
This is how more vaccinated persons get the disease than unvaccinated. Even if the infection rate was at 100%, there would still be more of the vaccinated getting the diseases because there are more of them!
A couple of other things, Mr. DeBerg.
You can help prevent pertussis outbreaks by going to your local pharmacy and getting a Tdap vaccine. The costs range between $50 to $100.
Also, with real citations please tell us how preventing a disease with a vaccine costs more than treating the infections? Let's take measles. At least one out of a thousand cases of measles requires hospital treatment, which is several thousands of dollars. Before the first measles vaccine in 1963, just about everyone got measles before they were fifteen years old. So how is treating at least one out of a thousand kids in the hospital for several days more cost effective than providing them two doses of the MMR vaccine?
Here is an article on how much the 1990 measles epidemic cost the state of California. You can use that as a starting place, but remember to take in to account twenty years of inflation.
Iâll call your uncited quotation about pertussis in unvaccinated vs vaccinated children (noting that the numbers of children in each group was not specified), and raise you a study which shows that unvaccinated children have a 23-fold higher chance of contracting the disease than their vaccinated counterparts: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/123/6/1446.full
Oh, and since I did find the abstract to your Witt 2012 study ( http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22423127, Iâll quote the conclusion for you (my emphasis added):
âOur data suggests that the current schedule of acellular pertussis vaccine doses is insufficient to prevent outbreaks of pertussis. We noted a markedly increased rate of disease from age 8 through 12, proportionate to the interval since the last scheduled vaccine. Stable rates of testing ruled out selection bias. The possibility of earlier or more numerous booster doses of acellular pertussis vaccine either as part of routine immunization or for outbreak control should be entertained.â
That doesnât sound as theyâre criticizing the practice of vaccination, does it?
Go figure: Chris beat me to the first one.
I think "Bill DeBerg" is actually Luke Rudkowski, who is associated with the NVIC and Infowars: (In fact, I wonder if the 'nym is a not-too-clever reference to the Bilderberg Group):
I think that Mr. bill deberg (luke rudkowski) is just a simple hit-and-run troll, so I assume we shouldn't be seeing his remarks for a while.
But considering the ironic statement he made about name calling, while just before that accusing us of being "pharma shills", just smacks of irony.
And considering that he consideres naturalnews as a "citation", I really have to laugh at his ignornance.
@ Novalox: I already *tagged* "Bill DeBerg" as being associated with three crank organizations... the NVIC, Infowars and We Are Change.org
I also made a connection between the 'nym and the Bilderberg conspiracy groups. Don't stop me now I'm on a roll...
All you pediatricians here worshiping at the alter of vaccines
Is this a reference to the mystical genome-transforming powers of vaccination, or just part of the continuing War on Literacy?
So, are you always against informed consent, or just against it when parents make decisions that you don't agree with. This bill is very similar to the anti-abortion bills that keep cropping up in various states. The purpose is to make it harder for people to exercise their right to make their own medical decisions. I do not need a doctor's permission to decide for or against the available vaccines. Perhaps we should turn the tables, and ask the doctors giving the vaccines to sign a form that explains that they know there is a risk of neurological damage with every vaccine, and that they will agree to be held personally responsible for any vaccine-related damage? Or perhaps, if doctors don't like that, we should leave the choice to the person who will ultimately bear the effects of that choice - the family.
You know, I notice a lot of ad hominem attacks here by the "every vaccine for every child" crowd. I don't think you would appreciate being called uninformed, reckless, etc., simply because you look at the evidence and come to a different conclusion. Many people on both sides of this issue are for informed consent. Making a different decision is not proof that one is uninformed.
For example, my brother in law is a doctor, and declined the Hep B shot for his newborn sons. Clearly, newborns are not at risk for an STD, so it would be far fetched to call his decision reckless or irresponsible. Good parents must judge the merits of ALL medical interventions for their children. We should be glad to have this right, not demand that every child be jabbed with every new vaccine they can invent, no matter the pros and cons. Surely everyone would agree with the understanding that vaccines do carry some risks, whether minute or simply rare. That's the position of the FDA, at least.
Yawn, necromancer, got anything else to your petulant whine?
What the hell are you talking about? Do you even understand what this Bill does? Quoting Orac:
Again, what the hell are you talking about? What part of the bill eliminates the parent's ability to choose?
Antivaxers don't want informed consent. They want to believe what they want to believe and don't want to hear information that doesn't support their antivaccine pseudoscientific belief system.
Molly @ 4:09 27 Jun
Actually, this bill is about informed consent. And making sure parents get it. It will close the loophole in the CA law as currently written that forces all schools, regardless whether public or private, to accept unimmunized children whether their parents have been informed or not.
I find it *useful* to check the AoA website, whenever a necromancer tries to revive a thread. From Kent Heckenlively...
I'm shocked, truly shocked...that a Tea Party group has thrown support to the Canary Party.
You do need the state's permission to send your snowflakes to public school, though.
"Not only would this be the first time in California history that the right to refuse a medical procedure which carries the risk of injury or death would be dependent on a non-neutral third party who is not compelled by law to sign the required form, it is also likely to be a violation of the First Amendment of the U. S. Constitution...."
There's a prompt swing and a miss.
"For example, my brother in law is a doctor, and declined the Hep B shot for his newborn sons. Clearly, newborns are not at risk for an STD"
No AIDS babies in Molly's world, evidently.
Wow, this Heckenlively thing gets even dumber.
Did somebody miss out on the bit about the Tea Party being all in favor of businesses being able to run themselves any way they please?
Jake ( in a comment there) chimes in with his own brand of rebellion to governmental oppression or suchlike.
Oddly enough, regardless of where they live ( e.g. John Stone also shrieks about investigations as do many commenters) , we hear plenty about spending in their *own* interests ( investigations, assistance) and LESS government simultaneously.
Of course not, you have the interwebz and mummy forums which surely make you more qualified than those silly doctors.
This bill is about informed consent. Please be honest and at least admit that you don't like your informed consent served to you by a qualified physician because your mummy instincts are way better than that.
Nice strawman, now quote any post which states any such thing.
Yes you are uninformed, reckless, etc. because you manage to look at the evidence, if in fact you really do and come to a different conclusion. That would indicate that you don't know how to parse the evidence.
If your doctor brother-in-law declined the hep b vaccine solely because he believed that hep b is only an STD then he should give his license back and not someone I would emulate nor quote as informed.
And how many parents are qualified to evaluate all medical interventions? Your hubris precludes you from understanding your limitations.
Science Mom...I wonder if Molly argues with her auto mechanic.
Science Mom...I wonder if Molly argues with her auto mechanic.
Now that's interesting. I managed to answer Science Mom before she even posted.
Mad skillz, clearly.
The other thing that's happening today is that the bill's being heard in the California Senate Health Committee. I wasn't able to go up to Sacramento although I wanted to. It's on right now.
"I oppose medical nazism based on voodoo science" -- chiropractor
One of the MIND founders pounding on vaccine injury
"Unconstitutional" -- Christian Scientist
Oh geez this is the same as the last hearing.
And the anti-vaxxers are asked to give only name and position and most of them keep trying to make more points. Now I really regret not going to Sacto.
The chiropractors are out in force. Life Chiropractic College is I think in Sacramento and they got a lot of students out to.
The drumbeat of "vaccine injury" is so relentless, I wonder if the Senators are going to fall for it. Oh but wait there are some educated Senators speaking now.
And the National Vaccine Information Center has a lot to answer for -- a lot of the antis said they were affiliated with NVIC.
Rob Schnieder (a movie director? Actor? Came out in opposition to the bill.
The Senator speaking now is female, didn't catch her name, supports the bill, she feels very strongly in favor in the bill and in high vaccine uptake. Now she's talking about parental fear of vaccines and things like autism and other problems. She supports more education because these fears are unfounded.
OK, I'll stop the live commentary coverage now.
OK, the school nurses association wants to be one of the groups who can sign off on the form, which Dr. Pan agrees to. I think this is a good idea. And now they are discussing adding pharmacists to the list.
Ooooh I am thinking that they are going to take the bill back to committee.
One senator concerned that there's not full disclosure of risks of vaccination. The senator is concerned that pediatricians are too biased in favor of vaccines. Pan: we want families to have a conversation and a relationship of trust with their physicians.
The one thing I haven't heard Pan say YET is how much misinformation and dishonest presentation from the vaccine fearful sites and anti-vaccine sites. What the senator doesn't get (I think) is that all the claims of vaccine injury are bogus.
The other thing is I guess one of the anti-vaxxers claimed that 84 out of 128 pediatricians would refuse to sign the affidavit for vaccine refusing families. Pan is indicating that perhaps this claim by anti-vaxxers is uhhhm not particularly factual.
Mad skillz indeed Shay. No, of course she doesn't argue with her mechanic because that is a skill that people like her are so clearly out of their depth with. And even moreso when it comes to healthcare but because information that is available in ignorant parent-friendly pablum formats, they become arrogant enough to believe that they know better than all of the experts.
OOOOhhh they are voting, but they only did a partial vote because some members aren't in the room. So far it was 4 ayes and 0 nays and a bunch of missing members.
Yet, these same folks are glad to declare that all of the studies done on vaccines are not science. Apparently because of the extensive use of mathematics, especially statistics, childhealthsafety (obviously Clifford Miller) has declared: Epidemiology is not science – period.
Ask them how they would design a study, but remind them that no child should be harmed, you just get the chorus thkweaming that the proper studies have not been done.
Shnieder is a third-rate "comedian" who appeared in some amusing films (The Animal) and some not so funny ones (both Deuce Bigalow films). When he mocked a film critic (who had bashed the first Deuce Bigalow) for never having won a Pulitzer, Roger Ebert mentioned his own Pulitzer and flatly declared "your movie sucks".
Schnieder is just another version of Jenny McCarthy: a has-been D-List celebrity who thinks his fame entitles him to greater credibility.
He was also the "makin' copies" guy on Saturday Night Live...
The bill passed out of committee.
AB 2109 passes Senate Health 7-1 with Blakeslee and Harmon voting in favor along with all Democrats (minus Rubio who had to leave early) . Congrats all - will share next steps soon.
Well it seems that Merck has been misleading the United States Government in the efficacy of the mumps vaccine and making huge profits by misleading parents and doctors into believing that children are going to be "protected" by their vaccine.
Talk about JUNK SCIENCE and mis-information.
How dare you deny any parent the right to opt out of vaccines when the prime motive of their manufacturers is PROFIT not health, when the pharmeceutical industry giant MERCK is willing to furnish false junk science to get their drug approved by the US Government.
Shame on you vaccine fanatical pushers. To purport such a crime is evil. To further that insanity is illogical and only supports the religion of junk science medicine.
The fact that somebody files a lawsuit claiming something does not demonstrate that claim to be true. And even if those particular bits of research were found to be false (for whatever reason), the amount of evidence supporting the safety and efficacy of vaccines would not be materially affected.
That is one of the most idiotic moves I have ever seen. First there are plenty of papers on PubMed on the efficacy of the Jeryl Lynn mumps strain (along with Urabe, etc). And second of all it by a pair of ex-employees who have not worked at Merck for ten years.
It looks like a coordinated smear campaign by those who have failed with science, and are now trying the courts.
And if Hep B were only be transmitted sexually you'd have a relevant point. It isn't, however, and you don't.
Gosh more blind religion of fanatics based on junk science and emotions not FACTS.
The Urabe strain of measles has its own problems with vaccination, it caused aseptic meningitis and for that reason its use was discontinued in the UK
You are not thinking very well, the only mumps strain used in the USA has been Jeryl Lynn. It is named after the daughter of the Merck employee who developed it into a vaccine from the sample he got from her when she had mumps.
Now try to read with some reading comprehension: there are several mumps vaccine strains. They have all been studied for efficacy and safety. While the Jeryl Lynn strain is not as effective as the Urabe strain, it is safer.
Here, knock yourself out.
And here is an actual paper, it took me two minutes to find with the medical center's wonky wifi:
Mumps Outbreaks in Vaccinated Populations: Are Available Mumps Vaccines Effective Enough to Prevent Outbreaks?
Thinking Mom @ 12:27 pm 28 Jun
How is the Urabe strain relevant to the lawsuit in Alabama?
From Thinking Mom’s own link @11:52 am 28 Jun
I suspect that if the Merck guy invented the opinion from the Department of Justice, one of their spokespeople will let us the truth.
That's supposed to read "let us know the truth"
My response was to Chris' 12:08 comment
Oh yes, the peer reviewed studies, the holy grail of the religion of the vaccine fanatics
Plenty o' JUNK SCIENCE out there, ghost written, falsified "evidence" and facts ignored
this Merck case is just the tip of the iceberg
And what's not junk science? Wakefield?
I think "Thinking Mom" has been hitting the MMS a little too hard....you're supposed to stop before you get diarrhea of the mouth....
The people jumping up and down, or the case? There's obviously a financial motivation for the qui tam plaintiffs. Note that the Department of Justice passed on prosecuting the case.
Sorry, I see that Chris had already noted this. I hadn't read to the end.
Citations desparately needed. Please indicate precisely which studies supporting the safety and efficacy of Mumps or MMR vaccines you're referring to here, and provide the evidence which demonstrates they represent junk science, are ghost written, contain falsified evidence, and/or ignore credibly established facts.
Thinking Mom @12:58 pm
I read all the comments by both you and Chris. I was asking you a question. Can you answer it?
Okay, Thinking Mom, go look at this paper on mumps vaccine efficacy and tell us which of the 106 citations are "UNK SCIENCE out there, ghost written, falsified “evidence” and facts ignored."
(It is the same as the paper I linked to above, but the HTML version has its reference list screwed up, the PDF version has the actual references.)
(non) Thinking Mom...mighty long on accusations and, mighty short on rebuttal *science*., eh?
You're not in Kansas anymore and you're not posting on AoA, (non) Thinking Mom. Now about those citations.....
I am not quite sure how well "Thinking Mom" is even reading. She does not seem to understand that there have been studies going on for years on mumps vaccine efficacy, and that I told her only one mumps strain was used in the USA.
First Chris, I am hoping that your trip to the medical building had to do with that cardio rehab returning to health stuff.
I just want to say how proud I am of this comment, on my semi-live (well, I was listening to the broadcast committee meeting) summaries of the AB 2109 hearing by the Health Committee, posted here last night.
The comments were copypasta'd to a FB group opposing the bill, and the copypasta-er asked who I was. (She was somewhat aggrieved that I did not appear to be in the live audience. However, I live about 4 hours from Sacramento, and didn't feel my presence would have shifted anything.)
It's the usual bit of good anti-vaccinationist research. I've never been to a vaccine-rights rally, and I've never been in the same town as Wakefield.
The commenter is referring to Jamie Bernstein's meeting with Wakefield. at the 2010 rally. Jamie is part of the Women Thinking foundation and one of the powerhouses behind the brilliant Hug Me, I'm Vaccinated campaign.
Thanks for the updates on the bill. And thanks for the link, I had a great laugh at the ignorance posted at that FB site.
Thanks for that utter display of arrogance of ignorance. You provided me with some good laughs for the day.
Please keep posting, I do need some chuckles and you seem like the perfect dunce to provide some laughs.
Yes. Three days a week for the entire summer (thirty six times that are authorized by the insurance company, that still covers this young man because of the federal Affordable Care Act, which has been approved by the Supreme Court).
Oh, "Thinking Mom", we are waiting for your analysis of the paper on the efficacy of the three mumps vaccine strains, including explaining which of the over 100 references were "Plenty o’ JUNK SCIENCE out there, ghost written, falsified “evidence” and facts ignored." Be sure to tell us which facts were were ignored and how the evidence was falsified. Be sure to back up your statements with real evidence.
Vaccines are one of the most dangerous public health risks in the world today. Children receive now over 36 shots before their 5th birthday (With more being added each year!) We've already witnessed Autism which was virtually non existant in 1930 when vaccines were at a bare minimum to 1 in 88 in 2008 (the most recent study done by the CDC them self!... so by now the numbers are even worse.)
Furthermore all you pro vaccines brainwashed fools simply spout the rhetoric you are told by your tv... over HALF of your favorite television's stations' revenue comes from the pharmaceutical industry! It's no coincidence that Big Pharma is always portrayed in a postive light on the idiot box! They pay hundreds of millions for that image!
Finally... the TRUE global authority on vaccinations (and their many side effects) is Dr Hugh Fudenberg. He has been studying vaccines since the 60's and has over 850 published peer reviewed journals 100% on vaccines. He is on the record as saying "receiving 5 yearly flu shots within 10 years will increase your chance of causing Alzheimer's disease by 1000%." This is a man with over 40 years of experience in the vaccine field.
Before all you pro vaccine zombies parrot some more rhetoric you have been programmed to spout, rather than THINK for your self you should check out Hugh's website.
some of his most recent peer reviewed publications:
843. Fudenberg, H.H.: Autism Induced By Lactation After Maternal Immunization International Journal of Clinical Investigation 14: 32-33, 2006
858. Fudenberg, H.H.: Alzheimer's Disease in INdividuals with prolonged exposure to Toxic Metals and Chemicals Submitted Neurotoxicology2011
So if this man, the WORLD WIDE authority and #1 most educated on the subject of vaccines is warning you of the dangers of vaccines, do you dumb sheep really think it's healthy for your to be injecting your children with 36 doses of POISON before they blow out 5 candles on their birthday cake? Use some common sense and stop listening to what PAID PROPAGANDA tells you. Some of the responses on this page are so juvenile and free of any facts or logic its an absolute disgrace.
@Chris s: strange, I don't see anywhere in Dr Fudenburg's CV that he has any training in immunology. His training all seemed to be in hematology, which is not the same thing. And I'm a bit bemused that he manages to submit so many articles to journals in a year - MOST reliable researchers only get 1 or 2 written. And what happened between 2005 and 2012? 7 years is a LONG time for nothing to be published - almost like he's become a quack.
Given that the man's bibliography is extensive, I just skimmed through it. He has quite a few publications on hematology - I'd give him authority for that. But since I can't find ANYWHERE that he has training and knowledge in either neurology or immunology, the fact he's written artlcles that were published don't impress me (after all, Andy Wakefield was published, too).
Now, if you can prove that Dr Fudenburg HAS this knowledge and is an authority in vaccines, without the relevant education, I'll thank you. Until then, I'll believe people who have training and experience in immunology, infectious disease, and other related health disciplines regarding vaccines and autism.
@ Chris S. Your pal lost his medical license because he was using some *Big Illegally-Procured Drugs*
Poor Hughie...he even got himself with the Wakefield mess and brought himself to the attention of Brian Deer:
Thanks for the laughs Chris S.
@ MI Dawn: Too bad I'll be missing the *fun* when you take Chris S. down. I'll leave Chris S. in your capable hands as I am signing off now...to pack for a trip to enjoy the holiday with friends.
Happy July 4th holiday to you all.
And what, pray tell, leads you to believe you know anything about the TV viewing habits of others? Projection? Wishful thinking?
if “the TRUE global authority on vaccinations” is Dr Hugh Fudenberg, how come most of us have never heard of him before?
Would you consider it juvenile if I point out that this assessment also describes your own?
Thanks for the laughs at your absolute unintentional stupidity. It's funny to see you projecting your own pathetic faults onto others.
In this case, calling you stupid isn't juvenile, it's an established fact after your inane posting.
So this disbarred drug addled quack charges $750 an hour? And they say Big Pharma is all about the money...
I know right? I don't even watch telly and I had no idea that's how pharma shills got their information. Besides, most countries don't even allow direct to consumer pharma marketing. I'm so glad there are Chris Ss of the world to enlighten us.
Isn't Huge Fudenberg the nut who claimed to have an autism cure that he made by rolling his own bone marrow on his kitchen table?
Yes, that's the guy. A colleague of Wakefield too. The Casewatch documents lilady posted are very interesting, especially the links to Brian Deer's site. Deer has memos going back to 1997 when Wakefraud was just starting to concoct his scam with this Fudenberg dude.
I don't have a TV, but my neighbor in the next apartment watches TV a lot, and I hear it. Is that poison by proxy?
This pro-vax TV misinformation must be homeopathic in operation, given that I don't have cable and thus watch maybe 5hrs a week via my ancient rabbit-ear antennea..
(The succussion is definitely there; some of the crap I see on TV has me head-desking.)
Most of the college age and slightly older persons I know do not own televisions. They instead watch programs over the internet. Sometimes legally.
The only program that my soon to attend college daughter and I watch together is "Project Runway." I don't believe there is much in the way of medical information on it, even though it is on Lifetime.
"Furthermore all you pro vaccines brainwashed fools simply spout the rhetoric you are told by your tv…"
So Emeril was wrong when he said I should season both sides of the meat?
Bill AB2109 and every other law that infringes on an individual’s right of choice of anything needs to go. It does NOT matter whether it’s a good idea or not, the government does NOT have the Constitutional authority to force citizens to do take a vaccine nor give one to their kids and its egregious that anyone thinks that government should do this. This kind of government backed , forced "good intention" acts are the first steps down a path to a tyrannical police state.
These transitions from freedom and liberty to a police state don’t happen overnight they come in small incremental steps. WW2 era Germany didn’t turn into a Nazi police state overnight. It came in waves of reasonable sounding acts by government until government had obtain enough power and control that it nop longer had to implement changes incrementally and that’s when they started yanking people off the streets and asking for “Papers please”. Only a fool believes this is not possible here just because we are the United States and or because we have the Constitution. The Federal Government has already violated several of the Bill of Rights via the Patriot Act and thru expansion of government authorities like the creation of the TSA. Remember the TSA? It was supposed to be for airport screening and yet we now have TSA agents leading military troops and local law enforcement in raids and check points on our highways. Just because you haven’t seen one of these check points that doesn’t mean they don’t exists.
Lastly, the author if this article is in serious need of a return trip to the classroom for basic reading skills because their interpretation of what the quoted individual meant is beyond ridiculous. It’s a stretch beyond description. It sounds to me like the articles author is practicing borderline “hate speech”. Might want to be careful with that as the Feds will soon start penalizing individuals for engaging n such unsanctioned speech and the 1st amendment be dammed.
Care to explain exactly how this bill "infringes on an individual's right of choice?"
BlueCollarCritic, do the laws that extend to infringing on your individual right of choice extend to buying car insurance? Because I believe it was your seventeen year old daughter that totaled our car by going through the intersection when she was not supposed to.
Fortunately our insurance company is presently dealing with her family to recoup some of their losses because they were not insured. This is no recourse to recoup the cost and worry that parents of babies who get pertussis or measles from your unvaccinated special little snowflakes must endure.
Oh, and this is delicious:
A Godwin! How fun and original. So do you also refuse to get a driver's license and refuse to show it to the nice police officer after running a red light?
BlueCollarCritic @ July 9, 8:35 pm
Have you even read the bill? Here’s the current amended text:
Please find the specific passages including the requirements “ to force citizens to do take a vaccine” and “ give one to their kids.”
Requiring that parents receive informed consent about vaccines is not “ the first steps down a path to a tyrannical police state."
Comparing the state of California’s closing a loophole in current law large enough to allow outbreaks of vaccine preventable diseases (measles, San Diego, 2008; pertussis, statewide, 2010) to Nazi Germany is ridiculous and, frankly, downright offensive.
Given that there is no right whatever to a "personal belief" exemption in the first place, your further "constitutional" blathering is misplaced.
as BlueCollarCritic has done, is to make unequivocally false claims.
The Weimar Republic, since the start of the Depression, had seen its constitutional arrangements torn up by a series of governments. At any rate, the Nazi Party had hardly made any secret of its desire to destroy the Weimar system, and began effecting the destruction of the Republic immediately after gaining power.
As texts such as The Coming of the Third Reich and The Third Reich in Power show, none of the key acts by the Nazi government which led Germany to a totalitarian state could be said to be reasonable on their own, to say nothing of viewed in their entirety.
So I think we can rack this up as an analogy fail. Try again, BlueCollarCritic. AB2109 is nothing like the kind of legislation pushed through the Reichstag from 1933 on.
Perhaps BlueCollarCritic is an undocumented alien, and is worried he is going to be deported because he has none of those nasty "papers." Like a driver's license, birth certificate, social security card or proof of motor vehicle insurance.