I got a chance the other day to converse with Sarah Pope, popular blogger and author also known as “The Healthy Home Economist.” Sarah is a cool lady that I’ve known about for a long time. She has written 67 articles exposing both the overstated effectiveness as well as the underreported dangers of various types of vaccinations–an accumulation of research’that dates all the way back to the pre-internet era. She was all up in microfiche at the public library while I was?getting’speeding tickets trying to make it’to the movie theatre?in time to see the opening scene of Tommy Boy. I think I actually made fun of the?nerds who had email accounts that same year. If they could see me now.
Because I had a truly nasty reaction to a vaccine in my teens to the point where I underwent extensive medical testing to try to figure out what was wrong with me, I have always been open to the idea that vaccination is not always the miraculous and safe practice that we were led to believe growing up.
Call me a crazy hippie Nazi science denialist. Call me what you will. But there’s something?fishy about vaccination.Hear our discussion and decide for yourself?how the risks and rewards of vaccination stacks up against one another.
Listen HERE.
I’ve seen that daily show before and they were mocking Sarah Pope big time
Yes, I embedded that segment from the show on the 180 Radio post for it. Big time indeed.
Anyone interested in the vaccine debate needs to watch this interview with Andrew Wakefield and hear his side of the story. Period. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIsFW5phHas
Andrew Wakefield is a fraud who was struck off the medical registry fir his actions. Read the investigative report Brian Deer wrote about him and his conduct. Read Paul Offit’s ‘Autism’s False Prophets’ and read the countless studies in recent times by experts in autism who are uncovering the true cause of autism (which is likely genetic with possible environmental influences in the womb). Read real scientists, not fear-mongerers.
If autism is genetic, why are per capita rates EXPLODING? Better diagnosis? Rubbish. Ask anyone who went to school over 30 years ago how many kids in the class had behaviour problems.
Better diagnosis tools for one thing.
With that said, I do not claim it to be either, it can be both something that increases autism AND better diagnosis tools.
In my family, AS runs high for severla hundred years. I am the first one to have a diagnos. Does that mean an increase of this? NOOOO, but my mothers aunt, born in 1913 could not get a diagnosis.
Then there are a difference between whole families having AS-personalities since several hundred years, or when ONE single person gets severe autism, maybe with low IQ (dont know the word for that in English, sorry). The later is what can increase. Maybe the first group to, if they are more sensitive to todays stressors in all aspects. Then they can develop symptoms that make them not function proper, when they as healthy, would be doing fine (think Temple Gradin or Bill Gates).
Never ever can we say “all this is due to XX only”. Especially since there are several branches of autism/AS which can be due to different things. I can almost always tell when a person comes from a family full of aspies, or if the person is the only one. So clear deifferences.
Also, just behaviour problems of all kinds can be due to MANY things. It can be what you claim, or it can be due to new, kunder ways to approach the pupils, leading them to behave as pleased.
It can also be due to bad food, stress, staying up late – and so on.
Autism arent just behaviour problem though. ADHD may be more like that, but autism has more to it.
It’s too late to look for the proof of the pudding if you’ve already become autistic. My sons reaction to MMR was severe digestive problems, high temps, emaciation and severe autism. There are a million stories of vaccine disasters if you care to seek them and sure genetic predisposition may be a factor. Is anyone really joining the dots between vaccination and the groundswell of ADD, ADHD, ODD, ASD, autoimmune diseases and cancers ? No profit in that…..
Rachel and Sue-
Autism tendencies generally appear around 18 months, when children receive the MMR vaccine. It has been shown in scientific studies, many times, that vaccines do NOT cause autism. I’m sorry your child has severe autism, but MMR did not cause it. Recent studies in autism are pointing to a genetic link, among other factors. Also, vaccines are not profitable. There is not a conspiracy to make money off of vaccines. I give vaccines daily at work, and we are able to see how much the patient is charged per vaccine. They are charged less for a pneumoccocal vaccine than a Tylenol…nice try.
Well I’ll be unsubscribing. The “Healthy” Home Economist is probably one of the top blogs promoting irrational food fear and denialist anti-vaccine woo, playing up rare side effects to scare people away from them. I didn’t think that was what this site was about.
I’m not quite sure that questioning both the purported effectiveness or the potential dangers of vaccination is “woo.” That seems like a closed-minded and polarized viewpoint that completely disregards the very plausible rose-colored glasses that a multi-billion dollar industry depends upon wearing when it comes to conducting research on any medication, vaccine, or medical treatment (many “proven” effective only to be found ineffective or extremely harmful later on). And this site is more about inclusion and willingness to explore any and all ideas with equal parts skepticism and open-mindedness on behalf of multiple sides of multiple arguments. I suspect the truth lies somewhere in the middle, with a jumbled mess of risks and rewards that make it difficult to determine what the best course of action is for a mother to take.
But if you choose to perpetuate dogmatism and quickly dismiss viewpoints that aren’t congruent with your own, then hey, you probably should be getting along now.
And of course potential adverse vaccine reactions,by law, are listed on the packaging inserts so to deny there is any medical risk is woo woo of the most blinkered and blundering sort. These lists are often long and disturbing if one cares to take the time to look.
Love your insight and comment here, Matt!! Love the site too!
Trying to do ya proud J Bone.
The thing is that the anti-vaccine stuff she is parroting has gotten a ton of attention from the mainstream press and even been in mainstream scientific journals. Until it was refuted and retracted. It got its day in court. It lost. For the record, in its heyday, I was anti-vaccine (as was my mother growing up ) and did not get several vaccines offered to me that I probably should have.
It’s funny because people like her latch onto rare reactions to show that vaccines are “bad.” Much like dietary nuts do about various foods (like celiac= gluten bad for everyone). I liked your blog because you were a skeptic against that kind of thing for food, but apparently not for other things. Anti-vaccine stuff gets plenty of press. Her blog is quite popular. It’s not like you are airing some kind of unusual unpopular viewpoint.
With science, the case is almost never closed. And any and all cases can be reopened. I’m not saying that the anti-vaccination point of view is correct. It may very well not be. But as someone who has suffered and seen others suffer countless atrocities at the hands of modern medicine (my ex girlfriend being told she had cancer and having an ovary removed, then later finding out she didn’t have it for example), I enlist very little trust in any scientific certainties currently en vogue.
Like any person, I’m constantly learning new things and always revising my viewpoints upon encountering superior information. And in that process I’m overly positive and overly negative at certain points about things that I’m taking into consideration. If you view the history here, it is repeatedly punctuated with exciting new prospects and a temporary period of irrational excitement, followed by taking the time to process through it and discovering the pros and cons and returning to more of a neutral and just stance.
I hardly think that an exploration into the vaccine issue is worthy of a quick dismissal of me as a thinker and researcher in the health and nutrition realm. If you feel the urge to enhance my education and provide a better viewpoint than Sarah Pope’s on the subject, please do so. I welcome a guest post on the topic anytime.
Matt- If you are looking for a guest post on vaccines, you could try Russell Blaylock, a retired neurosurgeon (ticks the “science” box) but also a critic of some vaccines- though apparently not all.
I’m not sure what the general concensus on Blaylock is and I am just making a casual suggestion as someone I could think of who is both a critic of “science” and a scientist; I’m not advocating his views per se. If you want to dig deeper on the vaccine topic he might oblige.
I would personally welcome 180 taking on this topic. I look on 180 as a voice of reason where particupants are willing to look past the establishment views and dogma.
I’m all about continuing the conversation. What’s cool about 180D is that no matter how polarized the conversation begins, the conversation continues until we reach middle ground and mutual understanding. Other sites just delete the comments they don’t like and cry “haters!”
It seems to me most who are pro-vaccination, lack sound systems awareness, and that spells trouble for all of us.
Specifically, viruses (bacteria, fungii), “germs” if you like, will prevail in environments, as per system need. New viruses are “emergent properties” of systems seeking balance, and/or growth.
Reality is self-organizing. All the way down. All the way up.
Galaxies arrange themselves in a fractal distribution.
Electrons make choices, yes*, go check the physics, in accord within (mostly) the bounds of the sub-system in which they exist.
“germs” are merely a responsive component of natural systems. They will propagate in response to systemic need.
Note * “Quantum mechanics makes matter even in the smallest pieces into an active agent, and I think that is something very fundamental. Every particle in the universe is an active agent making choices between random processes . . . consciousness is not just a passive epiphenomenon carried along by the chemical events in our brains, but is an active agent forcing the molecular complexes to make choices between one quantum state and another. In other words, mind is already inherent in every electron, and the processes of human consciousness differ only in degree but not in kind from the processes of choice between quantum states which we call ‘chance’ when they are made by electrons. [Physicist, Freeman Dyson]
And if you want to assert that reality is not self-organizing, as Dr Sahtouris has explained, then pray tell, what is it? God’s will? Chance? (see definition of “superstition”)
And if you want to argue “chance” (or “randomness”) is the fundamental reality, despite a holodynamic systems model being the only model that accommodates all the facts, including those of quantum physics, then again, explain how exactly that works, when the whole of reality is nonlocally interconnected, at once.
As physicist Herbert explained decades ago, whatever reality may be, it must be non-local (his emphasis!, not mine).
If you, pro-vaccination folk, were to (even for a moment) question why many leading physicists echo statements similar to Sir Arthur Eddington’s, “It is difficult for the matter of fact physicist to accept the view that the substratum of everything is of mental character? they might investigate what models account for the evidence (as did they).
You might wonder how seemingly independent entities “germs” can operate independently within “our participatory quantum universe …” (and how “germs” live independently of) “a radically interconnected and interdependent world, one so essentially connected at a deep level that the interconnections are more fundamental, more real than the independent existence of the parts of the quantum system.”
You might, like Prof. Mansfield recognize that “The great beauty of this result is that it emerges from experiment and analysis that are independent of the theoretical structure of quantum mechanics . . . ”
and like him, conclude “Therefore we know that nonlocality and acausality must be found in any empirically adequate theory of nature.”
A systems approach, recognizing its validity and efficacy in explaining and understanding a diverse range of phenomena, also should give you some relief, knowing that if we seek to cooperate with nature — Instead of attempting to outpace, or out-smart a profoundly adaptive system — “it” IS supportive of all life (despite competitive neo-Darwinian theories having been “naturally selected” during our great mechanical-universe meme phase, dating back around 400 years.).
Like Dr Norman Doidge, you might realize that our mechanical universe “germs bad” thinking has been “spectacularly wrong”.
“for the longest time, for 400 years, we thought of the brain as like a complex machine with parts. And our best and brightest neuroscientists really believed that. It was a mechanistic model of the brain and machines do many glorious things, but they don’t rewire themselves and they don’t grow new parts. And it turns out that that metaphor was actually just spectacularly wrong, and that the brain is not inanimate, it’s animate and it’s growing, it’s more plant like than machine like and it actually works by changing its structure and function as it goes along.”
Or like Dee Hock, founder of Visa,
(note for the squeamish, substitute ‘self-organizing” for “divine” in the following
“We are at that very point in time when a 400-year-old age is dying and another is struggling to be born — a shifting of culture, science, society, and institutions enormously greater than the world has ever experienced. Ahead, the possibility of the regeneration of individuality, liberty, community, and ethics such as the world has never known, and a harmony with nature, with one another, and with the divine intelligence such as the world has never dreamed.”
Further to Prof. Victor Mansfield’s view, if unlike Profs Mansfield, Dyson, Eddington, Planck, Henry, Sir Martin Rees and others, you don’t believe our world is radically interconnected and interdependent, you might also attempt to counter John Wheeler”s conjecture that “we are part of a universe that is a work in progress; we are tiny patches of the universe looking at itself ? and building itself. It’s not only the future that is still undetermined but the past as well. And by peering back into time, even all the way back to the Big Bang, our present observations select one out of many possible quantum histories for the universe.”
You might offer physicists an alternative interpretation of Wheeler’s Delayed Choice experiments, that, if credible would be sufficient, one would think, to earn you a Nobel or two.
While you’re at it, you might also want to explain how Prof. Reg Cahill is wrong or incorrect for proposing that
“Space and quantum physics are emergent and unified, and described by a Quantum Homotopic Field Theory of fractal topological defects embedded in a three-dimensional fractal process-space.”
In addition to the above, you should also severely reprimand physicist Paul Davies, who explained that — a basic component in our bodies, without which we’d be dead — “proteins” operate nonlocally. That, in his words “widely separated portions of the protein have to move in unison according to an appropriate global schedule, otherwise the molecule would get tangled up in the wrong shape. This activity, which is a result of a plethora of quantum interactions, is clearly non-local in nature”.
Similarly, Dr Fred Alan Wolf: “Each and every atom in your brain and body is connected (nonlocally) to each and every atom everywhere”.
Continuing to manipulate, control and suppress nature, with a mechanistic, hostile “bad germ” world-view, in direct conflict with a modicum of common-sense, or good science, will (en masse) extend an old dying belief-system that despite its many technological successes, causes immense upset, anxiety and disease.
Earlier I mentioned Dr Sahtouris, who said that we’re “now bumping into data that is forcing (physicists and astronomers) to see the cosmos as primarily conscious. Consciousness as the source of evolution rather than the product of evolution. This has been creeping up in science for 50 years since quantum theory was first proposed and now we have 50 years of evidence that life is intelligent from its initial bacterial stages and that the universe is permeated by non-material energies which are actually causing the creation of the physical world.” [Dr. Elisabet Sahtouris]
It’s extraordinarily easy, and I mean really, it’s extraordinarily easy to kibosh the assumptions upon which standard deterministic science is based (e.g. the belief that each physical effect, e.g. illness, must have a physical cause, such as germs).
The only model that fully fits the facts, including the evidence of the world’s most successful physical theory in the history of the human race (quantum physics) is that we exist (as per above Sahtouris quote) in a holodynamic, self-organizing sentient reality.
Long story short: vaccines are prepping nature to respond in ways we can’t and won’t be able to counter. The extent to which we think we can outpace a profoundly adaptive system (nature) with our mechanical, genomic manipulations and vaccines, is the extent to which we imperil the future of humanity.
If anyone reading this forum thinks viruses are static entities that can be wiped out or eradicated, they have not in the least understood the underlying systems of nature: of how nature will quickly and very very effectively evolve a new virus, or new strain of old (eradicated) viruses, to achieve balance in said system. Vaccinate away, to your hearts content, and watch the results.
What surprises me in these forums is the exceptional lack of intellectual rigour of people who advocate vaccination. That we exist in some sort of self-organizing reality has been known for decades. Furthermore, that self-organization occurs via instant (?nonlocal? faster-than-light) connections. We’ve known that, as a fact, for decades. ?Whatever reality may be, it must be non-local. Since ? experimental verification of Bell’s theorem, we know that any correct model of reality has to incorporate explicit non-local connections. No local reality can explain the type of world we live in. Furthermore, since Bell’s result is based on experimental facts, it is independent of whether quantum theory is correct or not. [physicist, Nick Herbert]
We now know that a fundamental process of living systems ? photosynthesis ? is reliant on these at-once interconnections: ?quantum mechanical probability laws can prevail over the classical laws of kinetics in ? complex biological systems, even at normal temperatures. The energy can thereby flow efficiently by — counter intuitively — traversing several alternative paths through the antenna proteins simultaneously.
To think we can second-guess, or outpace those ‘at-once’ (infinitely-fast) interconnections and processes, will be a fitting epitaph for the stupidity of the human race.
Excellent post, Stephen, I really enjoyed your reasoning there. The issue just isn’t as simple as cause and effect. As you say, however, there does seem to be an “exceptional lack of intellectual rigour of people who advocate vaccination”, so I hope you won’t mind me paraphrasing you for the dogmatists’ benefit?
Vaccines are sh*t, they f*ck up your immune system!
Nice post Stephen and thanks. Just what I was thinking however I lack the mental vigor at this time and so happy your could write it for me.
Are your implying that germs and viruses appear (pleomorphism)when the environment requires them to balance the toxic wasteland? I’m writing of the human body here and if I read your post correctly that would apply to all things in the universe.
There may be issues with vaccines but human memory is apparently short. Millions died of these diseases, mostly in childhood, prior to vaccine use. In places in the world without access to vaccines, childhood mortality is appalling. I do not think any of us wants to live in that type of world. Unfortunately, there are risks to every treatment and perhaps better preparation, distribution can help decrease the occasional, yet alarming downsides. Not getting children vaccinated overall is a very slippery slope. wade smith md
There are many errors in the logic you’re using here Wade. For one, you’re making the giant leap here that millions died of these diseases prior to vaccine use due to lack of vaccines. That’s not necessarily true. Living in close quarters, in unsanitary conditions, with frequent famines and poor nutrition in general (a lifestyle still prevalent in many poorer countries), is the primary cause of widespread infectious disease and high mortality rates from those diseases.
Fix those conditions, and disease is always going to be less prevalent as well as less likely to kill victims that contract the diseases, especially in modern times with modern tools and knowledge regarding care of those sick with an infectious illness. Vaccines or not. In fact, I’m willing to bet that in head to head combat, improved sanitation/living quarters/nutrition would prevent more disease than vaccinating people in a situation that’s highly conducive to the spread of infectious disease.
Opting out of vaccine use in North America and similar locales isn’t exactly going to bring back Black Plague-like conditions upon society.
Matt: i have always enjoyed, respected and recommended your work. However, on this point i will respectfully disagree. I do know the facts re hx of plague, infectious disease, etc and i work in a number of developed countries providing medical care. While sanitation and nutrition as you note, are huge impactors of human disease, the data is compelling that if US citizens stopped common vaccinations, more children would die or be disabled than currently. This does not mean questioning and research should not continue. However, not every MD is a mindless clone, spewing the party line or an idiot who believes everything published. I’m pretty sure it would be hard to find many conscientious physicians who could in good faith advocate for stopping basic vaccinations. Perhaps people should wait for more compelling and reproducible information before giving up on vaccines. Warm regards. tx
I couldn’t agree more, Melissa. I won’t be reading this blog anymore, either. Sarah Pope is a complete moron and promoter of pseudo-science and woo. I get questioning ideas, being curious, debating, etc. But vaccination is NOT a debate. Vaccinations have been extensively studied, time and time again, and have been proven safe. I’m really disappointed that Matt is promoting Sarah Pope and questioning vaccination; I was really hoping this blog wouldn’t go there.
Promoting Sarah Pope? Since when did having a conversation with someone constitute promotion? And what’s wrong with questioning something that made you violently ill? If questioning something that is promoted for health that made me and others violently ill is something that you call pseudoscientific crap, then you need to check yourself and pull the medical industry wool out of your face. I’m sorry that questioning the narrow, limited, paradigm from which you intellectually operate has made you upset. But it’s time for you to climb down off the high horse of aggressive certainty from which you are preaching your gospel, nurse. Certainty with aggression behind it is a classic symptom of having a weak mind incapable of broad and critical thinking. I believe that vaccination has benefits. But I’d rather take my chances with measles and whooping cough, choosing to emphasize as many factors as possible for immune system enhancement rather than take my chances with a vaccine (which have already harmed me more than any infectious disease ever has).
Having said all that, I openly admit that I could be flat out wrong, and that my bad experiences with vaccines might be a complete and total anomaly. My suspicions may be flat out wrong. If anyone cares to present me with research they feel confident in, and is willing to present some kind of compelling case for vaccine safety in a balanced, unemotional way, I’m here to listen. I always change my mind when I feel that I’m being presented with a new, superior point of view than the one I held prior.
Are motor vehicles safe? I think that’s a good analogy, really.
Modern transportation has improved our lives and health in countless ways (access to fresh food year round, and so forth). But some people crash and die while driving, due to conditions not being ideal. (We get sleepy, someone else does, etc.) Some people cannot handle vaccines, because conditions in their bodies are not ideal (at least, that’s how I see it).
Nothing in life is safe. Nothing. And science cannot “prove” anything. That is the first lesson I learned from my high school science teacher, who was pro-vaccine, btw.
I don’t like Sarah Pope’s blog any more than you do (although “moron” is definitely the wrong adjective for her), but your flounce here is a bit immature, honestly.
*meant to reply to Stephanie xD
My kids aren’t vaccinated. It took a lot of reading and exploring before making a decision that could have devastating effects, which kind depends on who you talk too.
This is not a decision to take lightly I wish there was more open debate out there so people can make decisions for themselves and not because they have been dictated to by either the government or big pharma.
Just have a look at what happen in the UK when small pox vaccine was introduced, there is enough there to say hang on a sec.
That and any pediatric chiropractor will tell you of the difference in motor control development between vaccinated and unvaccinated even when there are no other presenting issues
Vaccination is such an emotive topic, probably because parents need to decide to jab or not to jab within weeks of having a child. I’m from the UK so things are slightly different here, unvaccinated kids are not stigmatised or banned from pools and so on. A great resource for me has been the website “informed parent”, because being informed is a good strategy. My son (20 months) is not vaccinated, a good friend’s daughter (22 months) is. My friend and I were making these decisions at the same time and both faced a barrage of pro and anti “advice”, we both did our research and came to different conclusions but both our kids are thriving.
Some things I have learnt: a lot of anti-vax “info” is put out by Creationists. Similarly, advocates of Steiner-Waldorf education/ Anthroposophy also don’t vaccinate. Both cults have their own agendas, so be aware of this. Likewise, big pharma stands to gain incredible amounts from routine vaccinations and boosters.
I have seen the same stats interpreted for both pro and anti arguments, and some blatant dis-information
Whilst in the waiting room at the docs I saw this example of disinformation (and I hope the formatting comes through properly)
EACH YEAR 1 MILLION CHILDREN DIE FROM MEASLES. IN THE UK
NEXT LINE OF TEXT WHICH I FORGET NOW
Unless you inspected this poster closely, the full stop (period) was not clear, with the use of all capitals, a cursory glance suggests that measles is a massive killer. Less than 6 months later, Wales had a measles “epidemic” and all kids were encouraged to take vaccinations, a significant number did.
MY experience shows that the vaccination debate is a minefield, but my advice is to look twice at every source of information, find out who is behind it, what their agenda might be and who stands to gain.
Also, if you do decide to go for vaccination, they are all available singly, you don’t have to get combined jabs, and you can choose which you get and which you don’t get, you can stop any time.
A final word about autism. My friend who is an autism activist would say that what many people are calling autism is clearly brain damage. Many autistic people are high or over-achievers, they are just “wired differently”. They call us neuro-typicals.
Turns out Doctors and their families, as a group, are some of the least vaccinated folk around. Food for thought no?
‘Protecting Their Own: The Unofficial Vaccination Policy of Doctors in the Know ‘
http://www.ageofautism.com/2011/08/protecting-their-own-the-unofficial-vaccination-policy-of-doctors-in-the-know.html
Yes, I have also heard this. When thinking about whether to vaccinate my son I did ask the midwives who all said they had vaccinated, I didn’t see a doctor to ask.
This website is utter crap pseudo-science. I work in close contact with hundreds of physicians daily (I am a nurse), and all are HUGE supporters of vaccination. You all seriously need to look at mortality rates for VPDs before vaccines.
Kendrick, I read the link you posted. As far as I can see that’s one doctor’s position. I couldn’t see any information or statistics demonstrating that doctors and their families are the least vaccinated group around.
Also, the doctor quoted suggested he relied on herd immunity which would suggest that he believes vaccines work.
Finally, on reading the Age of Autism website, it seems to be somewhat of a conspiracy theory website. For example, it makes statements about how no one wants to investigate the causes of autism. This is completely false. There are many scientists around the world currently researching the causes and effective treatments for autism. Here’s a few organisations in the UK http://www.autismresearchcentre.com/about and http://www.researchautism.net/ (which also includes a list of professionals currently advising on & researching autism).
I think everyone has the right to vaccinate or not vaccinate based on their own informed decision. I’ve done tons of research on vaccinations & wished I’d never had my own kids vaccinated way back when. But both my granddaughters, age 8 & 9, have never been vaccinated. They are both very healthy & rarely get sick. My only issue is that other people need to respect our decision, which wasn’t made lightly. There is one lady at their school who won’t let her kids be around anyone who is not vaccinated because she thinks they’ll get something. That’s the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard, because if her kids are vaccinated, then they shouldn’t be worried about getting anything anyways.
I get your point, but the funny thing about vaccines is that there’s no claim made that you wouldn’t catch the illness they are purported to prevent, the idea is that they stimulate the immune system to create antibodies so that in the event you catch the illness-proper, you fight it better and get a milder dose.
Even so, the reason I chose not to vaccinate is because this sounds like a ridiculous idea- an over-stimulated immune system can cause chronic problems of its own, like asthma and excema and other allergies. A healthy immune system can tackle illnesses as they come, and develop as a result.
Such an idiotic comment. Your granddaughters are healthy thanks to herd immunity, thanks to people like me who do not believe pseudo-science and vaccinate our children. I wouldn’t want my son around your grandkids, either. The argument that that mother ‘shouldn’t be worried because her kids are vaccinated’ is also idiotic because vaccines are not 100%. They have been literally lifesavers, but they aren’t always perfectly effective. Also, some children, especially babies, do not have all of their vaccinations due to age. My son is still too young for his MMR vaccine, so he could easily catch measles if he was around your unvaccinated grandchildren and they happened to carry it (which is how pockets of measles outbreaks are now popping up around the US. Thanks, non-vaxxers).
The problem with letting every one choose for themselves, is that we lose ‘herd immunity’. And those that are unable to get a vaccination (infants and those with compromised immune systems to start with) are put at HIGH risk from YOUR decision not to vaccinate.
I was vaccinated, and never had a problem. I know that’s not the case for everyone – we’re all individuals, and life has it’s risks.
Kinda like putting on a seat belt. There are some accidents where the seat belt will be a detriment and could kill you… but in most cases, it will save your life.
I like the mom who said “I don’t need to get MY kid immunized, as long as everyone else gets THEIR kid done”.
Really??? you want to trust your child’s health to the actions of others? Seems a strange concept to me.
I think what it comes down to for me is that I obviously got very sick from a course of vaccinations. When this was voiced to my doctor, he actually smiled and said, “I’ve never heard of that” or something to that effect, demonstrating his belief in the infallibility of vaccines. It was very frustrating to be made to feel that I couldn’t be sick from vaccines because some statistics put together by someone somewhere said that vaccines don’t do that.
I’ve since caught on to the fact that every time anything is for sale anywhere, you’ll always see the benefits overhyped and the detriments either hidden or flat out denied. To think that the medical and pharmaceutical industries are immune to the basic tenets of marketing and capitalism is absurd. They are VERY good at it.
When “science” is a vehicle for the commercialization of a product, and the “science” is even paid for by those with a vested financial interest in the outcome, it is no longer science. That’s why hardly any “scientific evidence” should be taken very seriously. Even the uncorrupted science is typically poorly set up and results in very misleading conclusions.
People into “science-ism” that only worship that which is “evidence based” while slandering all that falls outside of that realm are basing their whole reality on a faulty foundation. The “evidence” is almost always tainted.
And like I said, even good evidence can be very misleading.
But whatever, I don’t need to continue to argue with those that always think that their science is the “right science” and all else is woo and fear-mongering.
It looks like most commenters would agree with you there.
Matt– What a conceited douche.
My sister had the same thing happen to her when she had a severe psychiatric reaction to the “safe” malaria drug, Malarone. She went to a bunch of doctors (some of them specialists in malaria and whatever diseases you can get while travelling, etc), and they told her, “you just have schizophrenia.”
So she was analyzed by two psychologists, and two psychiatrists, and not one of the four believed her symptoms indicated schizophrenia. She is not schizophrenic AT ALL. She “just” had a reaction to Malarone.
Two years later, she has improved somewhat, but is not recovered. I think an apology is in order.
As far as the vaccine issue goes, I pretty much agree with Gywneth Owlyn’s thoughts on this. I am an unvaccinated hippie child, so I have been considering, as an adult, whether or not I should get some of the more “important” vaccines, but it’s kind of overwhelming to sort through all the anger (not that it isn’t justified, but it can be hard to figure out what’s going on when there is so much heated emotional manipulation surrounding this issue–on both sides).
Anywayz, I think being born is enough to deal with on day one, and would hesitate to vaccinate an infant. There are other ways to protect wee babes. And those who have had bad reactions to vaccines should not be belittled, or pushed into doing any more, that’s foolhardy. Some of this stuff doesn’t really take scientific knowledge, it’s common human decency. xD
Hey! You calling me a conceited douche puddleduck?! I have a feeling you aren’t, but it sounds like you are, lol. If so, I readily admit that it’s true :)
OK, so the comment landscape has changed a bit since I made the above comment!
I did want to add to the conversation the observation that the sorts of “evidence” and “scientific studies” that other comments allude to (though I note there are no references supplied) would be from peer-reviewed journals with specific rationales. The advice to writers of articles for peer-review (I am one, therefore I speak with some knowledge of the process) is to offer articles which fit with the mandate of the publication: unless it is described as “critical”, it is unlikely that a “respected” medical journal would touch an article which railed against the received wisdom of the medical establishment, of which vaccination is a central tenet.
This shows how illogical it is to dismiss material from other sources as being somehow less authoritative, in the process of making a decision about vaccines.
The anti-vaccine movement predates positivism anyway, so to call it pseudo-science is inaccurate, if anything it’s pre-science! I’m afraid I am not familiar with the term “woo”, though I can guess that it describes folk beliefs.
To you folks who are unsubscribing…don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out. Take a a couple extra vaccines too, while you’re at it…you can have mine.
The pharmaceutical companies can make up whatever they want and call it science. If my dogs shits on the floor it’s more scientific and less stinky than what pharmaceutical companies call science.
As a long term 180 follower I am very disappointed to see anti-vax material and supporters rearing its/their ugly heads here.
Well don’t fucking cry about it Rob. If you have something to say and some views and information to share, please do so. The vaccination conversation is not likely to begin and end with my talk with Sarah Pope.
who are you calling ugly?
My, my! Pro-vaxxers are such a hostile lot. Kinda remind me of vegans with all that anger they throw about! Chillax, Man!
Susan- have you read the conversation? Most of the insults are being hurled from the pro side of the fence!
Matt, I used to believe in all the anti-vax stuff when I first had my kids. I read a lot of fear-mongering websites and was very concerned about what vaccines could be doing to my children.
But I am fairly open-minded and started to read some more scientific information to see if I could understand the issue better. The more I read the more I started to question my position. The thing is, vaccines are not 100% safe. No one makes that claim. Not the scientists who create them and research them and not the pharmaceutical companies who make them. If you want to speak to someone who understands the issue incredibly well then I’d suggest Dr Paul Offit. He is a paediatrician who specialises in infectious diseases. He is a co-inventor of one of the rotavirus vaccines and is an expert on vaccines, immunology and virology. He has written books on vaccines and related subjects. One of the things I like about him is that he does not shy away from discussing the issues with vaccines (including the rotavirus vaccine) and is not averse to highlighting problems with pharmaceutical companies etc. His insight into autism and the controversy surrounding treatments, vaccines and activism is fantastic.
Being pro-vaccine does not mean that someone thinks pharmaceutical companies are all great and beyond reproach or that all medicine is perfect and without problems. But there have been so many studies done into vaccine safety – research, meta-analysis, systematic reviews, research into autism etc and continually vaccines are shown to be safe. That doesn’t mean people don’t have reactions to them but those reactions are rare and the benefits of vaccines outweigh those risks.
I would encourage you to read some of the experts on vaccines. People who spend their lives studying and researching infectious diseases, immunology and virology. I know it changed my mind after years of reading/listening to only one side of the discussion.
Ann Marie- it seems to me that there are a lot of reasons why people might reject vaccines. From reading your post it seems that you thought the vaccine side-effects were risky but you are now happy that research shows side effects to be minimal.
Others believe the pharma industry is predatory and won’t buy in to it. Others have experienced unpleasant side effects, and so on.
For me, I don’t buy the immunisation theory. I think that some vaccines overstimulate the immune system to produce certain antibodies which heighten sensitivity, leading to asthma, excema, allergies and so on. My views are more aligned with the kind of thinking outlined by Stephen, above; we cannot successfully tamper with an immune “system” by targeting tiny aspects of it.
Therefore, tests showing that vaccines are safe on balance really doesn’t begin to answer the objections that a lot of people have to vaccination as a theory.
Think about this for just a moment…doctors and scientists now know that vaccines “wear off” in approximately 10 years. Who does anyone know that is getting a full round of booster shots in their teen or adult years? Hardly anyone does. Do you see where I’m going with this? This means that the majority of the teen, young adult, and adult population are walking around “unvaccinated!” Herd immunity is a joke. But keep soothing yourself to sleep at night thinking it is real. I could go on and on about more reasons why if you just use logic and reason, the vaccine equation doesn’t add up. However, I don’t need to. My first argument trumps the rest.
As dad to a 4 year old, i had to wrestle with this. I allowed him the jab because on balance I’d rather takes my chances with a condition he’s highly unlikely to develop, than infectious disease he’s almost a cert to get.
I don’t have kids, but I’d guess I’d be with you, Al, and go with the jab.
At some point, you have to trust your doctor to know something! And, if you talk over your concerns with your doctor and don’t like the answers (or feel your concerns are not being ‘heard’)… find another doctor…
I would think the “pharmaceutical industry” would make more money from treating the diseases than handing out vaccinations… so I’m not sure I’m on board with that conspiracy theory, either.
I hear that Bordetella bacteria (whooping cough) are mutating and getting stronger. I heard that, just as many antibiotics no longer work to destroy some bacteria because of the overuse of antibiotics, the whooping cough bacteria have mutated to be more powerful because of the the use of the acellular vaccine.
It seems to me that if we all strive for having strong immune system, even if we get sick from many of the illnesses, we would overcome them, and at the end of the illnesses, we are even stronger.
Of course there are many people who do not have strong immune system, and many argue that they need to be protected from those illnesses by giving them vaccines. As someone pointed out in this blog, the list of side effects from vaccines is long, and it is because, large part, the additives in vaccines (adjuvants), such as mercury, aluminum, formaldehyde, etc. They add these in vaccines because human bodies need to recognize that something dangerous has entered in to their bodies so the immune system notices this invader, and just getting small amount of certain bacteria will not activate the immune system to react enough.
Although pro-vaccine people argue that these adjuvants are so small in amounts, when one receives 70 doses of 14 vaccines by age 18 (26 doses of 6 vaccines by the first birthday!), one can imagine the amount of unwanted heavy metals and other chemicals in your system.
Most often the virus and bacteria of the illnesses that we are vaccinated for do get in from mucus membrane, not directly into veins. I heard that a body may get confused with what’s injected into the vein, and wouldn’t know if it’s part of your body or an invader. And this may create a situation of body’s not knowing what is “self” and what is not. This sounds like an autoimmune disease.
Anyway, I agree with Matt that we really need to be open to variety of views because it is so complicated. I feel for a mom who never had chicken pox as a child and is about to have a baby. I would not know what I would have done, as I had chicken pox as a child. But I also feel very uncomfortable getting vaccines myself or giving vaccines to my child because one never knows what effects they could have on your health in the long run.
It would be no fun to get sick, but I’d rather not get all that injected into my body.
And by the way, I or my family have never gotten flu shots, but we never get the kind of flu that some people do (sick with high fever for several days!) Just occasional cold or get sick with nice fever and be done in a day or two. My son (now 10 years old) has never been vaccinated, but he’s been healthy. We have friends and neighbors who get flu shots every year and they get really bad flu every year anyway. I ran into 3 people last winter saying they are done getting the flu shots because they still get sick.
In reviewing the comments in this topic, it appears that no one has asked a fundamental question: “What do you want?”
Do you want to be able to naturally counter disease, OR, be reliant on artificial means to do so?
Consider the latter, that we MUST rely on artificial means, rather than natural processes to regain health — what does that say about the innate viability of the human condition?
What deep-seated beliefs are operating to believe we can be, at root, victims to disease and circumstance?
For those who are pro-vaccination, is that what you genuinely want, to be vulnerable, to be victims, reliant on artificial concoctions?
What if one could naturally heal, without recourse to artificial preparations?
Consider the self-sufficiency angle — the knowledge that, with sufficient nutrition, and mind, we can be naturally well without reliance on anyone else.
Once you sample that space, of knowing there are natural methods and remedies to ensure wellness, the idea of taking various pills, potions, or being injected with artificial concoctions is genuinely horrifying ? not for their negative effect (although that is a worry) but that one may slip or devolve back into the land of fear and helplessness. That fear, albeit slight, is that we forget our power to engage natural wellness and to live with ease. A fear that is counteracted by the courage to find natural pathways, ease and balance.