Jump to content

The thorny issue of needles


  • Please log in to reply
258 replies to this topic

#251 Stepmumand1

Posted 11 June 2009 - 06:17 PM

BlondieHK maybe they are a lurker and don't need to put their point of view across very often. Why is it so many new members join up to post on the blog topic and get slammed for it?

#252 Scott-G

Posted 11 June 2009 - 07:27 PM

BlondieHK

Not everyone on here posts. I have read heaps of threads on here and on other forums.. i find these threads can sometimes give references to links for research..

yeah been to "Who", plenty of govt sites, Australian bureau of stats, Etc Etc.. Most of these only have selective stats and dont give anywhere near enough info to help any one decide.

Eg. Showing Stats only from the intro of a vax.

I realised just using Who and govt sites was not really a good way to make a fair decision, And in fact the info wasnt very convincing. Well Not enough to provide a good argument to vaccinate.

I have spent hours and hours going through these govt sites plus reading as many studies as i can plus going right through anti vax sites and trying to way it all up and look at the facts. I have had people tell me to not read info on anti vax sites, what a dumb dumb thing to say, how can you make a decision without looking at both sides.

I understand that everyone reads something different and stats can been manipulated to prove a point.

it looks impressive that a vaccine has dropped numbers by 90 odd percent since its intro but that means diddly squat if the disease had already dropped over 90 percent before the vax was introduced. Pushing over a tree that was about to fall on its own accord is no claim to victory!  

#253 chookas!

Posted 11 June 2009 - 09:34 PM

QUOTE
Pushing over a tree that was about to fall on its own accord is no claim to victory!

Love it!!

#254 BlondieUK

Posted 12 June 2009 - 04:25 PM

Measles?
Mumps?
Whoo[ing cough?
Were any of these disease rates falling substantially before vaccines were introduced.
Nope.

#255 IamzFeralz

Posted 24 June 2009 - 09:03 PM

QUOTE
I have spent hours and hours going through these govt sites plus reading as many studies as i can plus going right through anti vax sites and trying to way it all up and look at the facts. I have had people tell me to not read info on anti vax sites, what a dumb dumb thing to say, how can you make a decision without looking at both sides.


I think that because there are people like you who distrust government and WHO information sites that it's important that anti vaccination sites present not just the risks of vaccines but also the risks of the diseases and of not vaccinating.  I do not see this happening.  I notice that in my friends they have a blase attitude about the risk of the diseases and often say "when was the last time you heard about..."

One friend exposed her whooping cough positive child to unrelated newborns in the same room.  She is a good friend and I think had she known about the risk she would not have done it.  But she is not going to believe a government site because it's "biased" and "overemphasizing dangers".

We are often told we should make an "informed decision" but it seems that such sites only inform about the risks of vaccines and much less about the risk of the diseases and how to minimize risk to others.

#256 BlondieUK

Posted 24 June 2009 - 09:41 PM

alicat - again, selective info from you.
Is it not true that WC rates have been pretty steady (and pretty low) and that i is only in the last 5-6 years that tha rates have crept up, and only tending to be in pockets of hte population where there are lower vaccination rate?
Yep.

#257 lola2

Posted 09 July 2009 - 04:55 PM

If a child contracts WC from an unknown (unvaccinated) source, how is it possibly known if that unknown person was unvaccinated?

http://www.naturalparenting.com.au/flex/ch...fear-factor.cfm

#258 Babybear

Posted 09 July 2009 - 11:48 PM

OP you said:
QUOTE
The way I look at vaccination is: there is a tiny risk of an adverse reaction, compared to a much, much bigger risk of my children contracting a host of diseases if I had chosen not to vaccinate them. I’m willing to take the smaller risk.
(my bold)

I think it is only a tiny risk to you and some others who are adamant about vaccinations because so far you have been fortunate enough not to have had your children become one of the statistics.

I wonder if (god forbid) in the future one or both of your children was to become afflicted with a lifelong disability that vaccinations may have played a part in (because it is still yet to be proven definitively that vaccinations do not play a role, particularly in those children who are genetically predisposed towards disorders such as Autism) - would you still be counting it as a "tiny" risk? Would you be passing it off as "oh well, we knew there was a tiny risk and now it's happened, so we will just get on with it"????? I dont think so TBH.

FWIW I think the Wakefield study was well and truly flawed. And has caused alot of unnecessary damage.

But I also know that as yet there is no definitive proof that vaccinations DO NOT play some type of role in the onset of certian childhood disorders ie: Autism.

So for some, it is no tiny risk. And for those parents, IMO they are well within their rights to make a call that places what they see as the life long health of their children as a priority. As parents that is what we are programmed to do.

People can argue all they like that it isn't community minded etc etc. But show me a parent/s who would willingly risk their own child's long term health for the good of all - and I will show you Mother Theresa with biological children!

Has anyone considered that some people consider the risk of childhood illness/es a "tiny" risk compared to the so called "tiny" risk of a major lifelong disability such as Autism and the thought of leaving their disabled child in the world, possible alone without family advocates after their own death/s. I think anyone who calls the risk of Autism "tiny" has never had to live with it.

Thankyou to all those posters in this thread (and others here at EB) who have contributed relevant, recent, proven statistics from blind sources etc and well thought out responses - for either side. That is what I have generally come to expect here at EB when I read these debates.

Oh, and my kids coped just fine with their vaccinations thankyou.

#259 BlondieUK

Posted 13 July 2009 - 07:29 AM

Orange juice causes cancer.
No proof that it isn't true, is there? (Is there?)
My eldest is Autistic - to what extent, we are still unsure. Given that there is no medical evidence to suggest that even children who are 'genetically' predisposed to autism have their conditions 'caused' by vacines, we have chosen to vaccinate our youngest.
Maybe there will be research in 10 years that proves a link - but we can only make choices based on the current best medical practice - not anecdotal evidence.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

 
 
Advertisement
 

Top 5 Viewed Articles

 
Advertisement
 
 
 
Advertisement
 
 
Essential Baby and Essential Kids is the place to find parenting information and parenting support relating to conception, pregnancy, birth, babies, toddlers, kids, maternity, family budgeting, family travel, nutrition and wellbeing, family entertainment, kids entertainment, tips for the family home, child-friendly recipes and parenting. Try our pregnancy due date calculator to determine your due date, or our ovulation calculator to predict ovulation and your fertile period. Our pregnancy week by week guide shows your baby's stages of development. Access our very active mum's discussion groups in the Essential Baby forums or the Essential Kids forums to talk to mums about conception, pregnancy, birth, babies, toddlers, kids and parenting lifestyle. Essential Baby also offers a baby names database of more than 22,000 baby names, popular baby names, boys' names, girls' names and baby names advice in our baby names forum. Essential Kids features a range of free printable worksheets for kids from preschool years through to primary school years. For the latest baby clothes, maternity clothes, maternity accessories, toddler products, kids toys and kids clothing, breastfeeding and other parenting resources, check out Essential Baby and Essential Kids.