Banner
    Dr. Paul Offit: Polarizing Figure Only On The Fringe
    By Kim Wombles | January 31st 2011 09:50 PM | 66 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments
    About Kim

    Instructor of English and psychology and mother to three on the autism spectrum.

    Writer of the site countering.us (where most of these

    ...

    View Kim's Profile
    Dr. Paul Offit is the Hillary Clinton of the autism world. Or is he? It seems really unfair that a well-respected pediatrician and infectious disease expert who has devoted his career to saving lives is the recipient of the vitriol that places like Age of Autism and people like its editors and followers heap on him, all because he has the courage to stand up to their intimidating tactics and speak out honestly about vaccines. He's one of the first to admit that vaccines have caused damage; he writes openly and honestly about the live polio vaccine causing polio, about Cutter laboratories. 


    He writes eloquently of the role that concerned parents and consumers can have in calling for safer vaccines, in more vaccine research to minimize the unfortunately occasional severe side effect (like the Sabin polio vaccine had in infecting six to eight kids per year in the US with polio rather than preventing the disease (page 58 of Deadly Choices).


    Offit writes that if parents are looking to advocate on vaccines, pushing growing vaccines in "mammalian cells rather than avian ones. Although this procedure wouldn't be easy, it's doable. But, absent a public outcry, pharmaceutical companies have had little incentive to make the change and public health agencies haven't insisted they do it. Again, it's a perfect situation for an advocate" (page 59).


    So why is Offit constantly vilified by the likes of Age of Autism? Why is it so easy for so many to get the facts wrong? In an earlier post, I noted the tendency of people to rely on the claims of others (like Age of Autism) rather than looking at the evidence for the claims. 


    For two years, Age of Autism has consistently written outright falsehoods regarding Offit; even when there is every reason to believe they know their information is bad, they continue to dispense it. This week, Age of Autism has felt the need to launch multiple attacks on Offit.


    Offit has never passed himself off as an autism expert, despite repeated allegations by Age of Autism editors and commenters that he has done so. Today at Thinking Person's Guide to Autism, Offit responded to the notion that he is an expert on autism (he is a pediatrician and is likely to be more an expert it on it than Wakefield ever was):


    "That's a fair question. But I would argue that Jenny McCarthy is also not an autism expert. Nor is J.B. Handley, nor are any of these other celebrities that you see on TV. But I have read the research on the subject since 1940; I'd say that I've read as much if not more than anyone else who is also "not an expert." And as a scientist and clinician, I can form opinions that are reasoned and well-informed. 
    I'm never going to be an autism expert. The first thing I say when people ask me, "what do you think causes autism?" is that I'm not an autism expert, but I can tell you which studies are compelling. And I *am* a vaccine expert. 
    I don't represent myself as an autism expert, and I think people like Jenny McCarthy need to be upfront about that as well. They're experts in their own children, they're not experts in autism."


    You'll never see the folks at AoA or their true believers evaluate this; Wakefield remains a saint, even though it's clear he was dishonest and fraudulent, even though there is no doubt that he took a sizable amount of money from lawyers seeking to get money for MMR adverse effects. Wakefield, because he's "helping" autistic kids (how has never been explained; he's not licensed to practice medicine and was not legally allowed to see patients). No, the truth is that Wakefield fed parents what they wanted to hear and offered them false hope. He catered to their need for answers and someone to blame and he basked in the parents' adoration. He still does. Wakefield is not the only one to profit from desperate parents. The list of folks profiting off of them is pretty high. Let's not leave out Boyd Haley. Or the Geiers. Or any of the regulars who frequent the woo conventions and sell MB-12 pops and supplements and the hope of a cure.


    Blaxill pulls new numbers out of his sorry hide to keep rallying his troops that Offit's made money on vaccine invention. His numbers aren't right, of course, and they're irrelevant to the question of whether vaccines, specifically the MMR or thimerosal cause autism. The answer appears to be a pretty conclusive no. And the rotavirus vaccine has never been implicated, hinted at, etc. by this crowd of woonuts. 


    Handley this week feels the need to call Offit a lunatic and a liar and whip his followers into a frenzy. The Colbert Show page at facebook is awash in anti-vaccine conspiracy theorists.


    Offit donated the royalties of Autism's False Prophets to the Center for AutismResearch (CAR) at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. The royalties from his new book go to the Autism Science Foundation. He's not profiting on his books. He's not out attacking people's wives either and insisting they're anonymous bloggers who are fathers to a child with autism.

    Handley writes frequently about the hungry lie, but the truth is that Offit is not a part of that hungry  lie. Neither is Trine Tsouderos. Or Amy Wallace. Or Sanjay Gupta. Nor are Matt Lauer, Anderson Cooper and George Stephanopoulos.


    One need look no further than the antics of the writers, editors, and frequent commenters of AoA to see that there is an insatiable hunger to attack anyone who speaks out about the science on autism and vaccines. One doesn't need to go further than people who think the vaccine program is a eugenics program, that the world governments and pharmaceutical companies, and mainstream science have all conspired to bring one lone wolf, saint Andy, down.


    Paul Offit is not a saint, and he doesn't need to be put on a pedestal. He's a man with strong convictions, who works to save the lives of infants around the world from a disease that takes 500,000 a year. In his own words, he speaks out against vaccine misinformation not because there is profit it in it, but  "Because it's the right thing to do. Because children are getting hurt by all this misinformation. It's the reason I went into pediatric infectious diseases in the first place -- because kids get hurt." 


    Don't take my word for it, though, and for gods's sakes, don't take Blaxill's, Olmsted's or 
    Handley's (because I'm not sure they could find the truth if it gave them a lap dance). Go read Offit's interview at TPGA. Watch him on Colbert. Read his journal articles and his books.































    NECSS 2009 - Paul Offit from Maggie McFee on Vimeo.


    Comments

    Offit makes public statements every day about Autism. He stated just this week that sometimes Autistic kids just "recover" between the ages of 2 and 5. Really? Never heard that mentioned in the history of Autism. He wrote a book claiming that biomedical treatments are basically crap. Pretty bold for someone that does not think they are an Autism expert. My child recovered but was not between the ages of 2 and 5 and there was nothing "spontaneous" about it. It was a long and hard fought victory. According to the "Non-Autism Expert" my story is 1) all crap 2) purely anectdotal and hence unproveable (especially if they refuse to study our kids) 3) I'm gullible, uneducated, easily mislead and prone to conspiracy theories. All good with me, because I have a recovered child, and I don't care what Offit thinks. Before the spontaneous recovery claim he used to say our kids never had autism in the first place, apparently he's changed his story. Again pretty bold for a "non-expert" who has self-admittedly never cared for an autistic child. If I would have listened to "experts" like Offit I would have just institutionalized my child like I was told to and that would have been that.

    "He stated just this week that sometimes Autistic kids just "recover" between the ages of 2 and 5. Really? Never heard that mentioned in the history of Autism."

    Anon, how are defining "recovery?" Children lose their diagnoses all the time. That doesn't mean they are miraculously cured of a lifelong, neurological disorder.

    Wonder which drug companies he "consults" for or on which Big Pharma boards he sits......follow the money they say. I'll bet it is applicable in this case as well. Something just doesn't pass the smell test with this guy. "Methinks he doth protest too much". William Shakespeare.

    Suggestion to Kim Wombles:

    Avoid the vitriol towards Age of Autism--or does the "countering age of autism" blogsite name change to
    "Countering autism misinformation and various woo while offering [expletive deleted] kumbaya and a positive perspective (and lots of flowers!)" still really mean the former?

    kwombles
    sdtech, there's another word you're going to have to look up: vitriol. It doesn't mean what you think it does. Kickass isn't an expletive. As long as AoA puts out fabrications and misinformation, they'll get countered, too.
    “Nothing in the world is more dangerous than a sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.” --MLK, Jr.
    quod erat demonstrandum

    kwombles
    Right. There's a word for that, sdtech. 
    “Nothing in the world is more dangerous than a sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.” --MLK, Jr.
    A$ a creator and owner of vaccine patent$ as well as one of tho$e who choo$e$ which vaccine$ will be mandated it i$ downright de$picable that Paul Offit would advocate the forced vaccination of anyone u$ing his vaccine$ where he $tand$ to profit greatly. The "medical" and pharmaceutical community went to great lengths to discredit and accuse Dr Wakefield of fraud, for what? Now I would say financially there is great reason for someone that own$ the vaccine patent to commit fraud in testing or anything else, especially if he has the ability to chose which vaccine$ are forced upon u$. Where i$ the outcry?

    Paul if you care so much why don't you give your patents to an Autism group to use the profits to study Autism? How much have your patents "earned" you, how many of those patents destroyed children's lives?

    kwombles
    See, you prove so many of the points of my blog posts. When you rely on Age of Autism and other anti-vaccine rags for your information, you're screwed on so many levels. What a damn shame you've got both a dearth of intellectual curiosity and a reading comprehension problem. Offit is not receiving any more money on his vaccine. And he gives his royalties on his last two books to autism research.  
    “Nothing in the world is more dangerous than a sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.” --MLK, Jr.
    you do realise that when you use $ instead of an "s" that no one believes you have caccinte patents, right? Get a clue.

    The unfortunate truth is that some people who should get vaccines dont and some that shouldn't get them do. When i wa 18months, i got my scheduled shots, and within 3 hours had spiked a 105 fever, had seizures, and had to be resucitated by my grandman who just happend by my room while i was napping and didn't hear me breathing. At 10, i got a number of shots before hockey season, and withing 2 days had a severe rash develop that went undiagnosed (correctly, anyway) for 8 years. Turns out it was an auto-immune disorder called dermatitis herpetiformis (skin manifestation of in auto immune response to gluten. Similar to celiac disease) that i was told was psoriasis or eczema for 8 years. about the time i was 17, my brother was 19 and got his Hep B vaccination for college. Immediately following, he started throwing up 8-12 times a day. he didn't have a fever, and after roughly 3 years (and ten ER visits from esophogeal bleeding and stomach ulcers), it was determined that he had hyper-eosiniphillia gastro-enteritis. After many tests and trips up to Mayo clinic, we had 3 doctors, one in texas, one in cali, and one in delaware, who were willing to state the cause of his condition as the HEP B VACCINE. each one wanted 25-50,000 dollars to "cover expenses." these were doctors recommended by Mayo clinics doctors, so i have no doubt as to their quality of care (since then my brother has been placed on many experimental drugs. With a 95% mortality rate for hyper eosiniphillia, my bro has made it 12 years!). My father got boosters before going overseas and lost 40 lbs. that same month. Upon his return from his trip 5 days after the shot, he felt ill. however, he thought the losing weight side effect was great. Turns out he had developed diabetes (he was 5'10", 190 at the start. got down to 145lbs in that 30 days after the shot). he is diabetic to this day, although he is a svelt 180 and in better shape than most people.

    My point is this. If you took all of our cases individually, many doctors could "prove" or at least convince you that it was chance. Most doctors dont even acknowledge (at least not publically) that vaccines cause problems in some people. My family is as close to "proof" as it gets. I don't know why that is, but i suspect that certain gene pools are subject to autoimmune disorders more than others (it is established fact that autoimmune issues like celiac sprue, diabetes, rhuematoid arthritis, etc. run in families).

    We who make knowledgeable, experienced base decisions based on family history, witnessed reactions to supposedly "harmless" vaccines, and have to live with the consequences of the one's we got are NOT OUT TO BAN VACCINCES. Of the ones that i personally know of, we seek only to have it be OUR CHOICE. you have no more right to stick a needle in my sons arm with a vaccine in it than i have of putting an anthrax ladden on into yours. Ex-Nazi's were tried as war criminals for injecting concentration camp prisoners with vaccines because they did so against the will of the person being injected, for the sake of science. Now, go read the insert of your flu shot and tell me that you aren't scared out of your mind that you aren't the guinea pig.

    There is a federal program to compensate those injured by vaccines. You STILL trying to tell me vaccines do no wrong? I envy your niavete, but i hope nothing ever happens to you or yours because you simply will not understand. Vaccines do a great deal of good in this world, but to be ostracized or punished for making a choice to not be vaccinated is simply unfair. Regardless, if you and your kids are vaccinated, what do you have to worry about anyway? Oh, and for the Whooping cough outbreaks, i wonder if they will release the data on how many deaths were in immuno comprimised patients. 10 deaths in california, Dr. what'shisname said on the Colbert report. Here in ames, Iowa, we had 35 cases of whooping cough in our "outbreak" last year. 0 deaths. Not even ONE trip to the emergency room. Take your meds, go home, rest. Get a freakin grip people! You are so worried about Spinal menegitis you forget to buckle your kids in right, feed them crap that isn't even food, and let them watch 5 hours of TV a day, yet you freak out about someone who doesnt' want their kids vaccinated because they themselves were injured by a vaccine! Look at the odds, assess risk, and make a decision on fact and statistics, not propaganda. If you have no autoimmune responses to treatments in your history, go get immunized. If your brother is going to die before it is his time and multiple doctors say it was from a vaccination as MINE WAS, think twice but MAKE YOUR OWN DECISION>

    kwombles
    There's a saying that one's entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts. 
    It's a strawman argument to assert that mainstream medicine and science contend that vaccines are 100% safe and never cause harm. That is indeed why there's a federal compensation program.
    “Nothing in the world is more dangerous than a sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.” --MLK, Jr.
    Offit did not choose to "mandate" Rotateq. And nobody is forcing Rotateq on anyone - it is only recommended. You are the fringe anti-vaccine activist that Kim wrote about in the story that you either did not read, or did not understand.

    Autism affects ONE in ONE HUNDRED children, according the CDC, and Offit is not helpful as to a cause or treatment. Read Callous Disregard by Dr. Andrew Wakefield. Read Changing the Course of Autism by Bryan Jepson. Read Evidence of Harm by David Kirby.

    kwombles
    Proving the points quite well, sdtech. Jepson and Wakefield are not reputable scientists. And Kirby's book was full of errors and his thimerosal hypothesis is discredited. Kennedy Jr's piece was removed from Rolling Stones and Salon. 
    You have no factual information to back up your beliefs.
    “Nothing in the world is more dangerous than a sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.” --MLK, Jr.
    A new book is available today for those who wish to be educated about vaccines: Vaccine Epidemic: How Corporate Greed, Biased Science, and Coercive Government Threaten Our Human Rights, Our Health, and Our Children

    kwombles
    Let me fix this for you:
    A new book is available today for those who wish to be misinformed badly about vaccines: Vaccine Epidemic: How Corporate Greed, Biased Science, and Coercive Government Threaten Our Human Rights, Our Health, and Our Children. With this book, you too can become a paranoid conspiracy theorist who believes that aluminum salts and thimerosal are explosive in people's bloodstreams. The perfect Valentine's gift for folks who think vaccines are part of a eugenics program.
    “Nothing in the world is more dangerous than a sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.” --MLK, Jr.
    Kim may I ask if you have even read the book as it was just released yesterday?

    Hank
    I didn't get this one but I get dozens of pre-release books from publishers.   Otherwise there would be no book review until months after a book is released.
    kwombles
    One doesn't have to read it to know its content when one knows the authors and has read their stuff before. Hey, did you read Offit's and Mnookin's? Because all the folks at AoA are so insistent that folks don't need to read them, but they absolutely insist that we must read Wakefield and woo. I keep asking for review copies of the woo, but they won't give it to me. I wonder why, especially since I gave Stagliano's book a fair shake.
    “Nothing in the world is more dangerous than a sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.” --MLK, Jr.
    The first thing I ever saw Dr. Offit say in an interview was that he understood why parents would be concerned about vaccines. He recommended against smallpox vaccine because the risk/benefit ratio on a general level right now falls on the risk side. He donates the royalties from his last two books to autism research. And his regular job is, and has been for years, aimed at helping children. Yet he's a snake, and people like Wakefield, Olmsted, Blaxill, Handley, etc. who have never done anything for anybody, but pontificate and lie, are the essence of honor and should be universally believed.
    Paul Offit has actually done the research work in the area about which he speaks. He's been 'in the trenches' as it were, for his entire career. Those others, mentioned above, don't even work in the field, but they want to claim they know more about it than he does. And vilify him in the process. Which might not be quite so bad if they could just get their facts straight when they did. If they have legitimate objections to what he does, that might be one thing, but as far as I've seen they never even try. They just throw lies at the wall and hope something sticks.

    Gerhard Adam
    Vaccine Epidemic: How Corporate Greed, Biased Science, and Coercive Government Threaten Our Human Rights, Our Health, and Our Children...

    Hmmm, the only thing missing from that title is a reference to the Nazi's.  Apparently not enough room.
    Mundus vult decipi
    Kim - thank you for an excellent blog post. I am a pediatrician and I can FINALLY see that parents are starting to understand that the AOA crazies and the adamant anti-vaxxers have no credibility. How incredibly sad that children are having to die (H flu meningitis, pertussis, measles, influenza) because of all the misinformation these groups have spread over he years. Paul Offit is not an autism expert, he is a world-renowned infectious disease expert. He does know what DOESN'T cause autism (vaccines). Most parents of autistic children now realize how much time and money have been wasted disproving the vaccine theory. . . and diverted millions of dollars that could have been used to help understand the actual causes of autism and appropriate, scientifically tested treatments. AOA and the anti-vaxxers are finally being seen by the general public and by parents of children with autism as just as fraudulent as Wakefield himself. Thank you again for a well-written piece

    Funny how vaccine injuries, including resulting in autism and even death are never mentioned by the vaccine as a modern day sacred crowd enthusiast. And a ped who has such a superiority complex as to actually call others "crazies" makes me sick, but I definitely won't be making a call to his.her office for myself our my child. Disgusts me!

    Since Kim Wombles and the (cough) doc can obviously read, I can only mark it up as selective information retention.

    Actually, the truth be known, not only parents of individuals with autism, but the general population is starting to question the very ethics and safety of vaccines. It is sad that the medical establishment won't listen and vaccine corp continues to refuse to give their consumer what they so badly desire, safer, better vaccines.

    Gerhard Adam
    ...but the general population is starting to question the very ethics and safety of vaccines.
    Yeah, and the general public also believes in UFO's, ghosts, and a shooter on the grassy knoll.  If you're questioning the ethics and safety of vaccines, then you haven't been paying attention.  As someone that, no doubt, has lived through the benefits of such vaccines by not having to experience debilitating diseases and childhood killers, you've got a hell of a nerve coming off at this stage as taking the moral high ground.

    Science certainly isn't perfect, but if I had to put up with the errors that might occur in science versus the fickle stupidity of the general public, I will go with the former.
    Mundus vult decipi
    Nice condemnation of the general puplic there Gerhard. Your contempt is showing just a bit. So you are perfectly content to just swallow whatever explanation for catastrophe the government or corporate america offers up are you? How do you feel about the news story being peddled a few months back that mercury might in fact enhance brain function in children? Are you willing to offer up your children, nieces and nephews as guinea pigs? They might actually leap ahead of their peers in cognitive ability if this "study" has any basis in fact. What say you sir?

    Gerhard Adam
    ...story being peddled a few months back that mercury might in fact enhance brain function in children? Are you willing to offer up your children, nieces and nephews as guinea pigs?
    Why should I be any more willing to offer up my children in this context, than I would to accept any other individual's promise to make me rich if I follow their advice?  In other words, any parent that would even engage in such a discussion is already looking for some "advantage" and therefore is susceptible to being conned.
    They might actually leap ahead of their peers in cognitive ability if this "study" has any basis in fact. What say you sir?
    This is a classic "something for nothing" viewpoint.

    That isn't the case with vaccines, where they were developed specifically because of the high risk of childhood diseases for which they offered protection.  It is only within recent years where people have become shielded from the realities of such diseases that they have begun looking for rationalizing arguments.  However, even there, the problem is that there is no evidence to support their claims about harm coming from vaccines.
    So you are perfectly content to just swallow whatever explanation for catastrophe the government or corporate america offers up are you?
    You're seriously confused here.  This isn't about explanations, but rather its about public policy.  I don't trust government and I don't trust business to be my friend, nor to look out for my interests.  The only people I trust less, are those crusaders that insist I follow their advice because they "know the truth".

    Whether anyone likes it or not, public policy will always be subjective and involve differing opinions.  One guy thinks guns should be outlawed, while another thinks the 2nd amendment should protect his right to personal nuclear weapons.  The issue with vaccines is that they were not introduced out of malevolence, nor simply for economic gain.  So any explanation that seeks to challenge vaccine safety with those two points as a fundamental premise is already less credible.  Certainly we can argue that pharmaceuticals are interested in profits, but then that's why you have a family doctor to discuss these things with.  If you want to allege that the whole world is in a conspiracy against you and your family ... well , sorry, you're just a nut case then.
    Mundus vult decipi
    First of all, "DR." whatever, you need to retract your statement that anti-vaxxers have no credibility. There are thousands of doctors and US federal government program who would claim otherwise. The credibility issues are with people like you who would use a blanket statement to disservice what is a very real and scientifically founded arguement. Don't believe me? read just one of the inserts on the vaccines you inject people with. Lots of smaller side effects, and yeah, the real serious side effects are rare, but they happen, and they are debilitating and sometimes deadly. When was the last time you saw someone die from diptheria, doc? whooping cough? and did they have any immune problems before they were diagnosed? not a lot of people, in fact almost 0 people, die from diptheria in the USA. Nor chickenpox, whooping cough, measle's, etc. And not because they are vaccinated (more on that/me later), but because of not drinking water with poop in it and reasonable medical care beaing easily accessed. What the "anti-vaxxers" like ME are saying is that the first thing that needs to happen for people to make informed decisions is for their doctors to actually DISCLOSE that there are in fact risks to vaccines, that some people get hurt and even die from them, that the chances are small and the benefits outweight the risks, but then to RESPECT the decision on the parent who decides that no, their 1 year old in fact doesn't need the hepatitis vaccine, or the vericella vaccine. I got all my vaccines, developed an autoimmune disease immediately following (like 2 days) my boosters at 10 years, and to top it off, i show no immunity to half of what i was vaccinated against. Ain't that a daisy. please email me if you care to defend and i would be happy to discuss this further. bubba_ky1982@yahoo.com

    Funny how vaccine injuries, including resulting in autism and even death are never mentioned by the vaccine as a modern day sacred crowd enthusiast. And a ped who has such a superiority complex as to actually call others "crazies" makes me sick, but I definitely won't be making a call to his.her office for myself our my child. Disgusts me!

    Since Kim Wombles and the (cough) doc can obviously read, I can only mark it up as selective information retention.

    Kim Wombles is apparently a self-proclaimed expert and authority herself. WOW!! Gotta hand it to her, she wears her nasty, insulting, bully face well! So obvious she is unable to make a point w/o being a complete shrew.

    I love it how Aoa has 'em quaking and shaking in their boots. Speaks for itself!!

    kwombles
    Bless your heart, but you have such a reading comprehension problem. I could delete your comment, but I actually found it amusing. So brave, behind the mask of anonymity; did you cackle with glee while you wrote these comments? 
    After all, anyone who read the piece can see your little rants have nothing to do with the piece.
    “Nothing in the world is more dangerous than a sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.” --MLK, Jr.
    I am not pro or anti vaccine I am for personal choice. I am not sure how anyone can tell me that I have to inject something that the manufacturer states can kill, cripple and maim me or my child and then I am to blame as I signed the form taking responsibility....I have asked Doctors to sign and they refuse? why if is safe do they refuse to take responsibility? How many of the "Pediatricians" posting here are willing to sign the form as THEY KNOW what is better for the family? All you pro vaccine people please read the manufacturers labels, if you are OK with what the harm they say the vaccines can do then by all means shoot up as much as you want. If Kim and all the other pro vaccine people want to inject these things into them, let them I am not stopping them. And as people that are so sure the vaccine work and are safe, why do you want to force me to vaccinate? If you vaccinated your "safe" and the un vaccinated people are not a threat.....or are they because the vaccine doesn't work? ( Here comes the Big Lie, Herd Immunity---everyone has to be vaccinated for it to work.......and people actually buy that as science LOL) which is it, do they work or not? If they do then leave me and my family the hell alone and give me a conscience objection.

    kwombles
    You know, relying on places like AoA and other anti-vaccine sites for your information means you end up with bad information and look extremely ignorant when you parrot back their talking points.
    I'd recommend taking some basic science classes after you decide you don't actually know everything because you read a couple of sites that promote nonsense like the big hungry lie. 
    “Nothing in the world is more dangerous than a sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.” --MLK, Jr.
    Desptite your run-one sentences, i agree with you. The herd immunity is to prevent the outbreaks from spreading through the vaccinated or unprotected populations, but the reality that no one seems comfortable with facing is this. If 99% of the population (just an example, relax) gets vaccinated and the vaccine works, how could 3% possibly come down with the disease? Oh, surprise, all those shots you gave your kid? They DON'T always work. In fact, i show 0 titers for over half of what i was vaccinated against, as does my brother. Thankfully, neither of us died form our vaccines. I just developed celiacs dieseas and he got hyper eosiniphillia gastro enteritis...95% mortality rate in the first 5 years:)! YAAY. So glad im not gonna get whooping cough, i just don't know what i'd do!

    Where did I say I'm getting my information from AoA? I READ the manufacturers package insert. I did not parrot back anything, sounds more like you have some type of agenda against AoA as you keep bringing them up not me. I did my own research, I read the PACKAGE insert to see what the effects and what is in the actual vaccine. I have asked Drs. that wanted to require me to vaccinate and professed the safety of the vaccines to sign the documents taking responsibility for the consequences of vaccinating my children; they refuse so that gives me reason to question them. I ask why if the vaccines works does everyone need to get it, the lamest excuses ever.
    Herd Immunity---if 100% of the population is not vaccinated they don't work. Now that is NOT science. Maybe you are so simple minded that when someone in authority tells you something you believe as you are told. Kim that is YOUR choice. I do not need YOU, Paul Offit, or any Government entity or anyone else getting on there high horse and telling me I have to vaccinate and possibly, according to the PACKAGE INSERT maim, kill or cripple my child or myself or my elderly parents. If my research says the benefits do NOT outweigh the risks to my family, then I should have the right to choose and not be forced. As I said if you and anyone else wants to shoot up, go right ahead, do not force me to. This is where the image of Nazis comes in, when you force people to undergo medical experiments and testing against their will.

    kwombles
    Actually, for herd immunity you need about 90% of the population vaccinated. 
    And you're never going to get a doctor to sign something like that for vaccines or medications, because they're not 100% safe, and they never will be. Every medication you give your children, your parents, yourself has risk.

     So, when you parrot back the same rhetoric that sites like AoA and the various yahoo and google support groups and places like NVIC and other anti-vaccine sites, I'm going to rightly point out that they are the exact same talking points. 
    Oh, and thank you, the Nazi reference was perfect. Took it exactly there. 

    You going to get supermarkets to sign off promising that all food will be safe, too?

    “Nothing in the world is more dangerous than a sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.” --MLK, Jr.
    correct me if i am wrong, but supermarkets have to take old produce off the shelf, sell food within it's expiration dates, and suffer the consequences if their products cause people to get sick. Of course they would never sign off on that. Same reason that doctors never would...they KNOW there are risks involved in vaccination! When was the last time one of them admitted it to you? As far as talking points, when someone says something said before, it's not necessarily a talking point, it might just be a fact OR opinion. actually, saying things like "parroting" and "talking points", as in your quote

    "when you parrot back the same rhetoric that sites like AoA and the various yahoo and google support groups and places like NVIC and other anti-vaccine sites, I'm going to rightly point out that they are the exact same talking points".

    that is a line that sounds like it was written by the republican national committee press release! Using words like "rhetoric", "parroting", etc, in fact, sounds like the same rhetoric crap you are denouncing.

    kwombles
    http://community.tasteofhome.com/forums/t/748150.aspx

     "1.  Godwin's Law

    The most famous of all the internet laws, formed by Mike Godwin in 1990. As originally stated, it said: "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Naz!s or Hitler approaches 1."  It has now been expanded to include all web discussions.

    It is closely related to the logical fallacy “reductio ad Hitlerum”, which says “Hitler (or the Naz!s) liked X, so X is bad”, frequently used to denigrate vegetarians and atheists.

    As well as the descriptive form, it can be used prescriptively, so if any poster does mention the Naz!s in a discussion thread, Godwin’s Law can be invoked, they instantly lose the argument and the thread can be ended.

    If this is done deliberately to end the argument, however, it does not apply. This codicil is known as “Quirk’s Exception”."



    “Nothing in the world is more dangerous than a sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.” --MLK, Jr.
    Supermarkets don't force me to buy or use their products.

    kwombles
    So ignore the fact that your basic information is wrong. Ignore the fact that you brought up Nazis. Ignore the fact that medications carry greater risks than vaccines (and that you apparently have no problem with those). Ignore the fact that no one is MAKING you get vaccinated. You're free to never vaccinate, but that doesn't mean you're free to use governmentally run institutions without following public health mandates. 
    I'd suggest you take a minute, breathe, and realize you've been getting your information from some dicy places, and reading package inserts isn't research. You're making decisions from an emotional place not based on accurate risk assessment. And then, I'd really think about taking some basic science courses. Maybe that's too much work, though. How about you spend 60 bucks or so, go on over to the teaching company and buy Steve Novella's course on medical myths. You'd learn a lot. Of course, if you've been reading those sites whose talking points match yours identically, you'll think that Novella is part of the hungry lie.

    Prove me wrong.
    “Nothing in the world is more dangerous than a sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.” --MLK, Jr.
    Allowing people to be banned from public institutions based on a policy that is applicable to some and not others (claim christian scientist and you get in because they can't discriminate, but claim "oh, i was injured by a vaccine and have suffered the consequences since 1992" and they can ban you. which makes more sense?!?!) is in itself discrimination. If someone is allowed in and you don't want to get sick, get vaccinated genius. No one has REALLY answered me as to why they are so afraid of infection if they are vaccinated, but whatever.

    Aside from your unbelievealbly patronizing way of speaking, Kim Wombles, you ignore what people say in your responses. Dicey places to get info??? you include the package insert on the vaccine itself that shows the incidence of various reactions linked to the vaccine, and how many people are affected by the vaccine as a "dicey place"? Could you find a better source for determining the summed up risks/rewards of a particular vaccine?

    Just because someone doesn't agree with you or they had different results using a different (or even the same) treatments doesn't mean they are reacting emotionally, nor does it mean they aren't assessing the risks. you may feel that the risk of an adverse reaction is worth it to get protection from diptheria tetanis and whooping cough. Someone else might not. That isn't an emotional reaction, that is their personal risk/reward tolerance.

    As far as saying, "Of course, if you've been reading those sites whose talking points match yours identically, you'll think that Novella is part of the hungry lie." ...aren't you infact doing that exact same thing? it just happens that what you are reading you agree with. To deny that there is science on both sides is just plain wrong. Vaccines help many people. They also hurt/kill some others. it may seem worth it to you, but try telling that to the mother of a 6 month old who reacted and died "for the greater good." put yourself in their shoes.

    no one is saying that there isn't room form more knowledge in the area. how often do you hear 2 professional economist on cnn say two oposing things? What you (and many on "my" side of the aisle) need to realise is that differing opinions and experiences aren't necessarily wrong. We may find good arguements on both sides of the discussion. To dismiss and condescend the way you do does no one any favors, most of all you. Live and let live, and if you can't do that, i fear for us all as i am sure there are many people out there like you and like me. I will make the choices that i feel are best for my family, you do the same. i have a feeling we will all make it through this if we can remain civil:)

    :) Proven wrong. at least, not totally right:)

    kwombles
    We must have different definitions on civil, Kirk. Really different definitions. 
    Medical exemption exist for people who can't get vaccinated, so your argument fails there.

    Reading the scientific literature and forming an opinion based on that literature that is consistent with it isn't the same as reading quack sites and package inserts and then arriving at erroneous conclusions. 

    If you don't like how I respond, you're more than free to move on. :-) Really.  Or continue to rant away. Whatever suits you. :-)
    “Nothing in the world is more dangerous than a sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.” --MLK, Jr.
    Kim if you think it is so simple to get a Medical exemption ask the NJ family who's neurologist wrote a medical exemption for vaccinations due to the adverse reactions and was told the State would not allow the exemption----the Health Department then said just get a Religious exemption......

    Why is it quackery to read the package inserts?

    Kirk is not ranting or anything he is being quite civil, always two sides to a story, unless of course one story is not allowed to be told.

    As i am sure you've read some of my posts, the only thing missing from vaccines being held responsible in a COURt is a needle still in my or my brothers arm. Alas, the powers that be will not state, even in the opinion form (even though we were told so off the record) that the vaccine is probably responsible so my brother can recieve help with his medical bills. the physical and financial burden, i can tell you, is tremendous. You may then understand the slightly jaded view that i have of the "facts" and the "experts" when i and my family have not only been lied to(more like underformed, as most are before they get a vaccine) but also sold down the legal river by the very people who are supposed to first, DO NO HARM.

    medical exemption is not available in all states, and even less have philosophical. People cling to their religious exemption, even if it's a bit of a loose interpretation, for the same reason i do. I am not granted medical exemption by my clinic, nor was my son, simply because i couldn't PROVE that the vaccines i, my brother, and my father received caused our problems (even though mayo clinic has it in my brothers files as the cause of his autoimmune problems, and as my records show my reaction starting to take place within days of my boosters. it technically doesn't count because the reactions weren't documented within hours of the injections). You literally have to be hurt AND have a needle in you before they allow you medical exemption in AMES, IOWA. It is clinic policy to vaccinate. My doctor told me to find a new doctor for my child if i wasn't going to follow his vaccination schedule. How ridiculous is that.

    If you get vaccinated against your better judgement and you get injured, you are the "one in a million" that had that happen and they send you out the door with a "too bad it was you". If you DON'T get vaccinated and don't ever get it, well, you can thank your vaccinated friends for that. And if you get vaccinated and GET it??? Serves you right, they say. I'll take my chances, and so will my son. we have seen up close and personal the science, the odds, and the ability of even the most well intentioned to overstep their bounds and NOT do "no harm," with one of the most reputable clinics in the world to back us up...as long as they don't have to give a deposition in a court of law. Would hate to have their biggest donors lose interest because they testified against them! And that's the sad truth.

    Kim we have both had children who were damaged at a very early age. We choose to look into why such a thing could happen and to get our children the help they needed and deserved. We stopped vaccinating, used whatever medical information ( traditional and non traditional, we looked at EVERYTHING with an open mind) was available and our children are leading normal healthy lives free of the autism we were told they had and could never be cured of. I would suggest maybe you do the same instead of attacking people that don't want to do what YOU believe is right for your children. You have the right to do nothing Kim.

    I stand by my associating Nazis with anyone that would force me to experiment on my children or anyone else. You just don't like the analogy because its true.

    Gerhard Adam
    So, it's OK for you to voluntarily experiment on your children by exposing to all the disease risk factors that vaccinations protect against?  Are you equally prepared to be as understanding when others that feel as you do, introduce a deadly disease to your child because they also failed to vaccinate their own?  All in all, it comes down to the fact that talk is cheap when you're not sick.  However should you or your child get one of these diseases, I suspect you'll be one of the first screaming that the medical community should pull out all the stops to help you.
    Mundus vult decipi
    Oh gerhard, what you seem to be completely overlooking is that many people who choose not to vaccinate do so because they have already had the displeasurre of suffering from sideeffect medically stated to be be caused by vaccines. Myself? I almost died in my sleep at 18 moths... 6 hours after receiving my shots and 5:45 hours after showing signs of reaction. 105 fever, seizure before i left the office. Tell you what though. Back then, no one had the chutzpah to call the "establishment" out and say HEY!, what you just put in my kid is causing some pretty serious problems. had to be resucitated that night. My brother also had a near deadly (still is, in fact) reaction to the Hep B vaccine that immunoligist at Mayo clinic have linked to the vaccine. Not everyone who makes objection to blindly following the status quo is doing so because theire crazy aunt's best friends cousin told them to do so. Many of US have very close and personal and SCIENTIFIC reasons to avoid vaccines. I assume you havn't read your seasonal flu shots insert. The GSK one states ON THE INSERT that it hasn't be tested for safety in pregnant woman and childres, shows ZERO reduction in the length or incidence in the flu, and has many annoying and a few serios side effects. YOU say that reading a package insert isn't research. I say if the best research that a vaccine producer can come up with is as damning as what they put in the insert and PRAY to god that idiots like you don't read it, you deserve to be a guinea pig. If i choose not to be vaccinated, you believe i should not be allowed in public schools, correct? I have not problem with that, as long as it's no double standard. If i am not allowed in public schools, i will not pay public school taxes. That okay with you? no taxation without representation, am i right (i know the analagoy is a bit loose, but you can obviously see the principal behind it). This country has always been about freedom of choice. Nazi's WE'RE tried as war criminal for injecting people with medicines against their will. "Oh, but this is different." Injecting anyone against their will is NOT different, and if you did it to me, i would make sure you paid an even price, whatever that was. No one has the right to force anyone to do anything, whether it be drive, vote, vaccinate, eat, breath, or smile. You vaccinate your's, place your faith in the odds (as most people should), and leave us alone. Who knows, maybe we could be friends if you weren't absolutely petrified that your kids might get *GASP* the chickenpox. OH NOOOOOO! HAHA.

    Gerhard Adam
    ...if you weren't absolutely petrified that your kids might get *GASP* the chickenpox.
    OK, so we can see just how silly and ridiculous you can get.

    No one is forcing you to get vaccinations.  If you don't want them, then don't get them.  Unfortunately, you'll also be the one whining about how someone could let this happen when you contract a preventable disease.  It's rather obvious that you either choose to be ignorant or have forgotten just how serious these diseases are.  Vaccinations didn't miraculously appear out of thin air.  They were the process of combating a long list of very serious diseases that affected a large number of people, so when you reference chickenpox, you're simply being deliberately obtuse.

    Invoking the Nazi's always makes you look stupid, so stop it.
    The GSK one states ON THE INSERT that it hasn't be tested for safety in pregnant woman and childres, shows ZERO reduction in the length or incidence in the flu, and has many annoying and a few serios side effects.
    In the first place, what does the seasonal flu vaccine have to do with anything?  You don't have to take it, so don't.  In addition, your statement makes no sense.  OK, so it hasn't been tested in pregnant women and children.  What are the serious side effects that you're all excited about? 

    Unfortunately, arguing about a seasonal flu vaccine is like arguing about how dangerous motorcycles are.  If you don't like it, then don't use it.
    If i choose not to be vaccinated, you believe i should not be allowed in public schools, correct? I have not problem with that, as long as it's no double standard. If i am not allowed in public schools, i will not pay public school taxes. That okay with you? no taxation without representation, am i right (i know the analagoy is a bit loose, but you can obviously see the principal behind it). This country has always been about freedom of choice.
    The trouble is that it will always be a double standard IN YOUR FAVOR.  If your child infects my child with a serious disease, you certainly don't want to assume the liability of that.  In addition, if your child gets sick for a preventable disease, you'll use your medical insurance and drive up expenses for everyone for something that could've been prevented.  So, the problem here, is that you'll insist on having it both ways regardless of how such a scenario were to play out.

    You want to split hairs over public school taxes, but it should be obvious that not only is your analogy flawed (since you don't even need kids to pay those taxes), but that you think you're making some sort of "poor me" economic point about how exploited you are.  The simple truth is that if you don't want to be vaccinated then don't do it, but I would certainly hope that you'd have the brains to stay away from others if you do contract something. 

    Oh, and just in case you haven't heard.  There are no guarantees of safety or security in life.  Sometimes bad things happen and sometimes they are terrible, and sometimes they are fatal.  It comes with the territory. 

    Mundus vult decipi
    First off, i want to acknowledge that finally i am talking to someone with a brain. Thank you.

    It's true. Even if you are 60 with no kids, you have to pay school taxes. However, if you wanted to get an education, you would be allowed into the 3rd grade if that's wehre your aptitude put you. To deny someone access to that system and still require them to pay for it isn't fair. no one is denied the right to public school because everyone at some point has paid for it...except people without vaccinations.

    As far as MY child infecting YOURS (who is presumably vaccinated), the liability doesn't rest with me at all, anymore than it would if your child would have been unvaccinated. if you are looking for someone to blame, why not the person who shot your child up and told you they were now safe from whatever my child just gave them. They are the ones who lied, who gave you false security. No, you couldn't POSSIBLY blame them, they had your best interest at heart! and yet, here you are with a kid who gained nothing, much like mine may have gained nothing (much like i infact gained nothing from many of my vaccinations [i show zero immunity to many things vaccinated for]), and we all have a case of the chicken pox. I promise your kid won't get hep b from mine, if that's what you are worried about!

    "you'll also be the one whining about how someone could let this happen when you contract a preventable disease. It's rather obvious that you either choose to be ignorant or have forgotten just how serious these diseases are."

    Those are your words. Since when did chickenpox become a serious disease? Or measels. of diptheria? Sure, in 1865 they may have been problematic for some. Today, the ability to treat diseases simply with rest, hydration, and antibiotics if necessary (and often time NOT when necessary) has made these diseases into a nuisance, not a threat. And i don't want you to think that i believe all vaccines are worthless, cause i don't. Polio was debilitating, tetanus can kill, etc. But the reality is that anyone who died from chickenpox, the measels, diptheria, the flu, or a multitude of other diseases PROBABLY had a compromised immune system. it's no secret the weak and old die way more often from the flu/cold/lions. That's not saying that a healthy 30 year old couldn't, but the chances are so small they are not worth considering.

    Because i don't have the seasonal flu vaccine insertin front of me, i will have to rely on all of your own due dilligence in obtaining one from wal-mart or wal-greens (im sure that's too much to ask of you all who would rather not know what the vaccine entails). Side effects range from fever, siezures, headach, nausea, vomiting, autoimmune issues, rash and swelling at injection site, and more complicated reactions including, yup, death. I am not going to make your day and tell you that there is a good chance you will die from the flu. There may be much less chance you die from the vaccine than the flu itself, but for me, i will take the good ol flu anyway. you know that over half the people at my nana's retirement community get the flu shot, and most of them get the flu or flu like symptoms anyway? Hell, i don't care if it stops me from getting the actual flu. If i still am nauseaus, puke, get a fever....what's the difference! The insert shows that anywhere from 5-25% of people show these responses (not all inclusively. you don't necessarily have to have nausea to puke or a fever to have a seizure). "take this and you may feel like you have the flu, but at least you wont get the flu!" "and oh yea, we haven't actually shown any reduction in the flu in people who get vaccinated." Im not effin kidding, that is what is says in the Fluleval (i think that's what it's called) flu shot from Glaxo Smith Kline that they were giving out in november at wal-greens in ames, iowa. I asked to see the insert from the gal giving the shot...she said "what for?" HAH! To truly answer your question about what the seasonal flu has to do with anything, it's this. The mentality of the people responsible for our safety has gotten to a point where a few expendables is acceptable. I will not argue that life is unfair and sometime the bear eats you, but damnit, i should have a choice (without social/educational repercussions) as to whether i want to go out into the woods or not!!!

    The whole idea that my unvaccinated kid is going to get your vaccinated kid sick has 2 unbelievably huge flaws in it for anyone to use that as an arguement. 1) your kid CAN'T get sick from mine if he/she is vaccinated or 2) your vaunted vaccines don't work on everyone. Now, i am sure that it's #2, because i am living proof of that. given that there is no guarentee of SAFETY or EFFICACY, it is ludacris to make someone get a vaccine if they don't want it.

    YES YES, no one is forcing me to vaccinate my child. however, they ARE forcing undue expense in $$$ and time and effort to afford them the same "rights" that vaccinated kids are afforded. Don't you worry about me, i have the means to send my kids to private school or even home school if i need. What a lot of people forget about in this conversation is PRINCIPAL. I can no more force you to believe that vaccines may be harmful (which the vaccine producers themselves admit) than you can make me believe that they can do no harm. I don't call child services on you when you vaccinate, you have no right to do so to me for not vaccinating. If you have a problem with what is taught in science class, pull your kid, don't demand a change in the curriculum. My unvaccintated child poses no more threat to your child than a rusty nail covered in bird crap. you gonna ban those too? either believe that your science is right in effect making you invulnerable, or accept that it's a gray area and allow those in different situations from you to make decisions based on facts, experience, and science (which you will admit has shown some negatives from vaccines, or we will cease this convo presently). I am not telling you you must agree with me. I am just telling you that you have no right to force me to agree with you.

    Gerhard Adam
    As far as MY child infecting YOURS (who is presumably vaccinated), the liability doesn't rest with me at all, anymore than it would if your child would have been unvaccinated.
    Go back and read my post.  I specifically indicated the risk would be incurred by someone that couldn't be immunized for whatever reason (perhaps they believe as you do).  I did not suggest a vaccinated child was at risk in my scenario.

    Your point about the seasonal flu vaccine is simply irrelevant and has no bearing on anything, since it is strictly a personal choice as to whether you want it or not.  There is absolutely no stigma attached to not getting it, and there are no requirements to obtain it.  (I'm going to put your comments regarding school taxes in the same category - doesn't really matter since it isn't germane to the discussion).
    ...it's no secret the weak and old die way more often from the flu/cold/lions. That's not saying that a healthy 30 year old couldn't, but the chances are so small they are not worth considering.
    That's actually a fascinating statement to make.  Would you be prepared to concede that it's on par with suggesting that perhaps only those with weakened immune systems are at risk from vaccines?  After all, with millions of people having been vaccinated without incident, does this argument make sense to you (after all, this is the kind of reasoning you accuse scientists, pharmaceuticals, and government of)?
    I am just telling you that you have no right to force me to agree with you.
    That's true, but I do have a right to stop your participation in any area where you increase the risk to those around you.  That's the fundamental principle being quarantine (in the case of virulent diseases) and it certainly applies in numerous areas ranging from your right to carry a gun to school to your ability to manufacture drugs in your basement.

    You see the problem here, is that you have the mistaken believe that you can live in a society with millions of other people and no one has a right to tell you how to behave in that society.  Sorry, but it doesn't work that way.  I have protection against many diseases through vaccination, but even so, there are numerous diseases for which one doesn't get vaccinated.  I have a right to ensure you take care of any animal you own that may have rabies (you assume liability).  I have a right to ensure that you abide by a quarantine order in the event of a virulent infection.  I have a right and the expectation that you will not blithely ignore your own infective state and risk those around you because you are apathetic to the consequences of those around you.  Like it or not, the same "protections" you want for yourself are also those that others seek for themselves.  So while you may not agree with the majority, you will abide by their choice (or you can move somewhere where they agree with you).

    Mundus vult decipi
    OOOH, i re-read your beautiful piece of crap im responding to, and i just have a few things to say.

    FIRST. you are right, the world isnt' fair and there are no guarentees on safety or security. however, to say that maybe sometimes bad things happen and that sucks to someone who was never told, for example, that a vaccine could cause harm, is NOT the same as saying to someone "yeah, it's true, if you go 120mph and turn a corner, you might roll your car and lose your ability to walk." There is reason and understanding involved in driving a car and the possible consequences. With vaccinations (or any medication, for that matter), it seems that fewer of the risks or possible reactions are understood or even acknowledged. if you say that's not the doctors fault, whatever. It's someones fault,, and it seems when it's regular people who bring it up, they are the "crazies" and the loons we should all steer clear of.

    If my 16 year old gives your 17 year old AIDS, who's liable for that? ME? yeah right. communicable diseases have always been and will always be a part of society. Because i choose not to get a hep B vaccine doesn't mean that i will or will not get the disease, nor that i am or am not responsible for transmitting it beyone a moral level. If i GOT the vaccine and didn't respond, am i still responsible as if i hadn't? That's like saying i THOUGHT i put on the safety before i pulled the trigger, and yet i still blew that guy away. I didn't mean it. That's just LIFE. there's no difference between accidentally shooting someone and accidentally accidentally shooting someone. same with vaccines/transmission of diseases that people can get vaccinated for.

    If you really want to solve a major issue with vaccines, i suggest demanding NOT that people get vaccinated, but instead demanding that their IMMUNITY to specific diseases be at a certain level. I, for example, am not immune to the MMR's, hep-b, and a few other, even though i received my vaccinations. Simply because i was shot, should that make me exempt from the ridicule and ostrazisation that my fellow people who haven't been immunized, who yet show the same level of non-immunity as me (or more importantly, maybe had mumps as a young kind and actually has immunity from it even without the vaccinating?)? You're priorities are wrong! you want conformity in place of thought and results. I am not the first to suggest testing for IMMUNITY, not shots. i fear, given the amount of headwind and MONEY in the shots industry, we have a long way to go.

    want more proof that the industry does NOT have your best interests at heart? There is a company called amarillo biosciences (that i hold shares in...disclaimer) that has a treatment to prevent and shorten the flu. it has a room temp shelf life of 2 years, refrigerated is 5 years, has 0 side effects, simulates (in fact is) a protien that is produced in the human body (iFa, or interferon alpha), works on ANY infection (not gene specific for flu like the flu vaccine), and costs about $.30 a day. It's called veldona. It has shown in multiple clinical trials, including one last year in perth, australia, to not only boost the results of tamiflu, but to BEAT IT outright in trials. You haven't heard about it, no? i wonder why. must be those big pharmaceutical companies trying to make you as healthy as possible! Sheep.

    Gerhard Adam
    You haven't heard about it, no? i wonder why.
    Are you really that naive?  I got over 2500 hits on Google?  This is your idea of a SECRET (not to mention the obvious point of how you heard of it)?

    Please stop creating false dilemmas.  I don't have to agree with everything the government does, nor corporations, nor pharmaceuticals.  There are many social/political issues that need to be addressed and only a fool would think that everyone else has their best interests at heart.

    However, only a fool would think that WHATEVER they are told, in any capacity is ever risk free.  Whether it's a reaction to a vaccine, or getting E. Coli from a burger.  Since when did you think that whatever you were told, was a guarantee that there was zero risk and no possibility of harm occurring?

    Your gun example makes no sense, since anyone with the slightest sense of responsibility knows that YOU NEVER POINT A GUN AT ANOTHER PERSON!  There is no "accident".  There's no "oops" moments with a loaded weapon.  However, you did manage to spin what I said by suggesting that not getting vaccinated and intentionally exposing someone else to the disease is exactly the same thing as not knowing your infected and exposing someone to the disease.

    Once again, you can't be that naive.  You really think it's the same thing if I loan you my car to drive and the brakes fail, versus loaning you the car knowing in advance that the brakes are defective.  You think these are equivalent situations?
    ...communicable diseases have always been and will always be a part of society.
    ... and you're simply arguing that even if we can protect people you think its perfectly fine to live as we did several centuries ago. 

    However, let's be clear that vaccines have helped millions of people and while no one was to have a bad outcome, it isn't quite the same thing as simply arguing that vaccines are arbitrarily bad.  If you don't believe that vaccines are bad, then why argue so much about it.  You've stated that you don't want to use them, so fine.  However, you keep coming back to the inserts and warnings about how unsafe they are.

    So, you're being disingenuous, because your really arguing that people should stop getting vaccinated, because you've effectively said that to continue would be stupid given the risks you've identified on the inserts.  So, if your objective were achieved, we'd be turning the medical clock back 100+ years.  Perhaps THEN, you could find out if chickenpox really is deadly.
    Mundus vult decipi
    Listen chucko, your analogies are wrong. I didn't say (or didn't eman to imply) that i'd go get chickenpox and come over and sneeze all over you. I was saying that if YOU can hold someone who isn't vaccinated accountable for transmitting a vaccine preventable disease, that you should ALSO hold someone who GOT a vaccine and it didn't work enough to get them immune so they then become a transmitter. Like in your gun analogy (which i think is false, because an accident is simply an unintended action/consequence. Car accidents, gun accidents, falling out of tree accidents. They happen, that's life). you're car analogy is wrong too. I woundn't let some borrow my car if its breaks didn't work any faster than i would have unprotected sex if i knew i had HIV. Your analogy about knowing the breaks fail is equivalent to knowing i have a disease, which is simply not the case. The real analogy is this...if you loan your car out after getting it's breaks checked when 7 yeas ago, the breaks could still fail, just as though you got vaccinated at 10 and show no immunity at 17. THAT is no different than having not had your breaks checked in 7 years or never being vaccinated. The end result could well be the same.

    Also, you continue to misconstrue my statements and arguements as though i am againsts vaccinating entirely. As i have posted before, i am well aware that many vaccines have great value and have saved millions. I can admit that and am proud that we have been able to banish many dangerous illnesses into the pages of history. What you can't seem to get from what i say is plainly this...

    Vaccines have and will continue to cause harm in some people who get them. To suggest that someone who chooses not to get vaccinated is making a foolish, uninformed decision is simply not accurate because most are, in fact, weighing the risk/reward based on their own or their families historical reactions to shots. If you saw my families medical records, you would be amazed at the "coincidences" of when our auto-immune systems went haywire, causing life altering incurable diseases, in relation to the proximity of the auto-immune CHALLENGES (which is what doctors call the vaccination process) that we had for our immunizations.

    The odds of having a reaction of serious consequences is rare, but so are the odds of being hospitalized or worse for pertussis or diptheria or some of the other vaccine preventable diseases. I am simply making the case that just because there is a vaccine for something doesn't mean you actually need it. My son got his DTaP because tetanus is real and can kill, and he has a reasonably high chance of contracting it. Others, like Hep B he won't get until he's 18 and can make that decision for himself because he is not at risk for Hep B. unprotected sex, intravenous needles, and blood transfusions are the only way to get that.

    And who is calling who disingenuous? Chicken pox are NOT deadly in relation to what we are talking about....certainly less deadly than cars, guns, or whatever else you can think of. I am not saying nor ever said that i expect things to be 100% safe, vaccines included. Proper disclosure of the risks (like you get EVERYWHERE else from your cars maunal to the "do not touch, high voltage" signs and even kids toys with their choking hazard warnings. I KNOW ITS A CHOKING HAZARD, yet they put them on anyway for further protection) is what i am suggesting. What is frustrating is that when someone like ME says "hey, look at the insert your doctor gave you and see what may happen if you get this vaccination. There are side effects to this shot," there is invariabley someone out there like you screaming "conspiracy theorist! anti-science fear monger!!" You couldn't be further from the truth, yet you won't just stop and read what i am saying. The choice to vaccinate should be an informed, educated one, in which a "yay" or a "nay" can both be right answers! We respect your choice to vaccinate, you will respect ours not to even if you don't agree with it. You view isn't entirely wrong, nor is it entirely right, just like mine. The difference is that i can admit that and you don't seem to be able to put yourself in anyones shoes but your own.

    Gerhard Adam
    Like in your gun analogy (which i think is false, because an accident is simply an unintended action/consequence. Car accidents, gun accidents, falling out of tree accidents. They happen, that's life). you're car analogy is wrong too. I woundn't let some borrow my car if its breaks didn't work any faster than i would have unprotected sex if i knew i had HIV.
    First of all, that isn't the definition of an accident.  A drunk driver may not intend to kill someone, but if they do, it isn't considered "accidental".  Similarly if you point a gun at an individual and pull the trigger, that's not "accidental".  We all know the difference.

    Regarding disease, unfortunately, far too many people insist on going out in public, to work, to school, etc. while they KNOW they are infectious, although they may not know specifically what they have.  That is also NOT accidental.

    The problem with your posts is that you don't advocate a reasonable risk assessment message, instead you fill them with anecdotes regarding your personal history without indicating whether your consider these unfortunate rarities or common.

    Have you ever once suggested a reasonable course of action to become "informed" beyond reading the inserts?  After all, if you simply read the side-effects from aspirin that may convince many people that it is far too dangerous a drug to not be regulated.

    Common side effects:

    Heartburn; nausea; upset stomach.

    Severe allergic reactions (rash; hives; itching; difficulty breathing; tightness in the chest; swelling of the mouth, face, lips, or tongue); black or bloody stools; confusion; diarrhea; dizziness; drowsiness; hearing loss; ringing in the ears; severe or persistent stomach pain; unusual bruising; vomiting.

    http://www.drugs.com/sfx/aspirin-side-effects.html
    As you've stated, there are risks associated with any action you take.  Being well informed means knowing what the relative risks are, in terms of a reasonable probability and not some rare occurrence.  Unfortunately, many people will simply interpret that to mean that any risk is unacceptable and opt to not participate.  At which point, they will be considering the risk they can read, instead of the one that they don't see (i.e. the disease being prevented).  So, it's all well and good to talk about being informed, but along with those vaccine inserts, why not include a description of the disease being prevented.  Perhaps them people would understand what it is that is being proposed.

    So perhaps while you're trivializing chickenpox, perhaps you want to review the RARE outcomes that can occur here as well:
    Other complications of chickenpox are rare. They include:
    • Varicella pneumonia. Pneumonia can develop if the chickenpox virus travels to your lungs. Pneumonia from chickenpox is most common in teens, adults, and pregnant women who have chickenpox in the last part of pregnancy. It is also more likely to develop in people who smoke cigarettes, have lifelong (chronic) lung diseases, or have impaired immune systems.
    • Inflammation (swelling) of the brain, known as encephalitis. Encephalitis can develop about 5 to 10 days after the chickenpox rash appears. In children, encephalitis most often affects a specific part of the brain (cerebellum) and is called acute cerebellar ataxia. It mainly causes poor muscle coordination, although other symptoms of encephalitis can also occur. In adults, this complication is more likely to affect a bigger part of the brain and cause more severe symptoms. Encephalitis symptoms include confusion, a high fever, a severe headache, sleepiness, sensitivity to light, and nausea. In the most serious cases, a person may have seizures or tremors. Treatment may include medication to help relieve symptoms. Some people with encephalitis may need to stay in the hospital.
    • Vision loss. Chickenpox virus that spreads into the clear eye covering (cornea) can leave scars that can cause vision loss.
    • Reye's syndrome. Reye's syndrome can develop in young people who take aspirin during chickenpox or flu treatment. It can be prevented by not giving aspirin to anyone under the age of 20.
    • Inflammation of the joints (arthritis). Sometimes people with chickenpox have pain in their muscles and joints. This pain usually lasts as long as the chickenpox rash. Medications taken for fever or other general illness often help ease the pain.

    The following complications of chickenpox are very rare:

    • Inflammation of the nerves of the eye (optic neuritis) or the spinal cord.
    • Inflammation of the tissues surrounding the brain and spinal cord (meningitis).
    • Nerve damage that causes problems with movement of the face or other parts of the body.
    • Certain blood disorders, such as a decrease in the number of blood cells that help clot blood (thrombocytopenia).
    • Death. Before introduction of the chickenpox vaccine in the United States in 1995, about 100 people died each year from chickenpox.1

    Women who are pregnant when they have chickenpox are at risk of complications such as premature labor or varicella pneumonia, and the fetus is at risk of developing chickenpox. Fetuses with chickenpox are more likely to develop birth defects or other complications before and after birth. Newborn babies can also get chickenpox when their mother has the illness within a few days of delivery.

    http://www.webmd.com/hw-popup/complications-of-chickenpox
    Mundus vult decipi
    So one in 100 people died from the chickenpox. That sucks. There are other things that can happen too, as you've shown. Those things are exceedingly rare, and if you are calling a disease that kills 100 people a year a "deadly" disease, so be it. I think 100 is a very small number actually, given that 1500 people win the state lottery of at least $1million each year in this country (answers.com). 100 is nothing, not to sound coarse. About 13,000 injuries were reported from the battery of vaccines given out in 2010, of which about 2500 have been paid out by the government for being PROVEN to be caused by the vaccine, while about 5300 were not paid out as they could not be proven (trust me, it's VERY hard to prove a vaccine did anything even if sypmtoms are incontrivertable), and the rest have not been addressed. This also does not include the many more who go unreported like my brothers because a doctor couldn't be "bought" to provide a testimony, or the parents simply never thought that the vaccine could have possibly been the cause of a reaction because a doctor gave it to them and they would NEVER do anything to hurt their child. Talk about misrepresenting risk, you are calling me out, when in fact you are 15 times more likely to win a million dollars in the lottery than die from chickenpox. And i hae to tell you, but the odds go up every time you inject something....http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/statistics_report.htm

    There were over 13,500 incidents REPORTED last year alone, of which roughly 4-5K will be proven if the trend continues to have been caused by the vaccine, meaning roughly 400 people will be PROVEN to be killed by reactions to vaccines. I am NOT SAYING that fewer people would die if vaccination stopped entirely, but i am saying that by choosing not to get a vaccine, or by understanding the risks...the proven, documented risks of vaccinating, I would be making a wise and informed decision either way i went. I personally will chose to "roll the dice" and not vaccinate my son from a number of things, especially ones that tend to have higher rates of reaction like the MMR.

    You said, " Being well informed means knowing what the relative risks are, in terms of a reasonable probability and not some rare occurrence. Unfortunately, many people will simply interpret that to mean that any risk is unacceptable and opt to not participate." The threat of serious complications or death from the vaccine OR chickenpox are very rare, whether 100/year for chickenpox or 400/year for all vaccines (remember, that number is only those PROVEN, which is extremely hard to do), we are talking ridiculously small chances. I simply choose to allow my immune system to do what it was designed to do, you choose a staged infection to trick it into developing antibodies. 6 of one, half dozen of another. I don't care. Either way is fine by me. As for the people who "simply interpret that to mean that any risk is unacceptable and opt to not participate" line? Those people are idiots, man, and you can't use them as an arguement. I am talking about people like myself who weigh not only the documented risk on the insert/doctor warning, but also the risk of the actual disease, possible complications, personal history, etc. I already stated some vaccines are worth a possible risk of reaction because what they prevent agaist is particularly nasty. Some simply, in my view, don't warrant the risk because the risk of reaction to the vaccine is as high/higher in a serious case as the infection from the disease itself. I gotta go, at work, goin home.

    Gerhard Adam
    Well, you sure play fast and loose with the statistics, but .... whatever.  I only used chickenpox because most people think it's a trivial disease, but then you turned around and compared that with ALL the vaccine incidences.

    My point remains.  If you want to compare the risks associated with disease outcomes, then you can consider weighing them (each individual disease) against the vaccines.  Instead you seem to want to focus exclusively on the risks of vaccines.  Rare is rare, so unless your point is that vaccines represent a higher risk than the disease itself (which you know isn't true), you're biasing your information.

    As for your statistics, I'd like to see sources.  13,000 represents approximately how many claims were filed and/or settled since 1988 (a total of 23 years).  Of these, over 5,000 were dismissed, so I suspect your numbers are a bit inflated and don't represent an accurate representation of the risk you're claiming.
    http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/statistics_report.htm

    Mundus vult decipi
    kwombles
    Yeah, I'm pretty sure that's not right on the analogy. But you know, there are unstable folks out there who think that getting a vaccine is exactly the same as being lined up and shot by the Nazis (true, someone wrote that and defended it beyond the absurd). One can't make them see reason. That's okay, though. 
    You're wrong. No one's lining you up and making you get vaccines. And it's not medical experimentation to get a vaccine. But that's okay, because obviously you're not coming from a position based on evidential reality. 
    I'm not attacking, and I'm not doing nothing, but you know, again, when you're under the delusion that vaccines cause autism and all, and that you can, for example, chelate the autism right on out  of them, well, come on now. You're just following those woo sites, aren't you? If it makes you feel better to think I'm doing nothing to help my children achieve their potential and that you are the superior martyr parent, I'm okay with that. I really am. 

    Oh, and asking a doc to sign a form that reads like this makes you look completely ridiculous. You avail yourself of traditional medicine but don't think those traditional meds carry greater risks and affect more people adversely than vaccines? Really? Good for you. 

    "I have on this _________day of ___________________(month), A.D._________(year)
    administered this vaccination/medication/drug AFTER advising the above named patient that there is no risk involved with this vaccination, medication, drug therapy or treatment to the good health of my patient whatsoever. Therefore, and because any potentially negative or adverse effects of said vaccine(s) are apparently (and contradictorily) no longer insurable as being too high a risk, I hereby agree, without reservation, that should this patient at any time suffer or develop any permanent condition deleterious or injurious to my patient's health as a result of this treatment, I will personally pay for any and all costs involved relating to the care and treatment necessary for this patient for the rest of (his/her) natural life. I further agree that if my earnings are insufficient to meet these costs, I will sell my home, my business and all of my material possessions and put those proceeds towards meeting the patient-involved expenses"  taken from _http://www.vaclib.org/legal/accept.htm.
    Parden me while I just file you into the appropriate schema. After all, you refused to prove me wrong.

    “Nothing in the world is more dangerous than a sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.” --MLK, Jr.
    Sir you state as fact that vaccinations protect us against disease, I give you the right to believe that just like I believe I have the right to disagree and not be coerced by fear. I did trust in the vaccines and the establishment and got sick children for my right to believe them ( any parent that sees first hand the devastating effects vaccines have within hours to days can understand this, if you don't want to see a correlation, that is your right also). So my choice is to now go with no vaccines and I do accept those risks as is my right; why do you want to take my rights away? Especially since you believe they work so you must believe you and your family are protected from those that choose not to be vaccinated. I do not accept the risk associated with vaccines. One only has to look at vaccines such as the flu mist vaccine that once again ( everyone really should read the manufacturers insert, its amazing we read ingredients to foods but not something that is injected or "misted" into our bodies) according to the manufacturers insert it states and I quote " The probability of a young child acquiring vaccine virus following close contact with a single flu Mist vaccinee was established" "vaccine recipients or their parents/guardians should be informed by the health care that Influenza A H1N1 2009 Monovalent Vaccine Live Intranasal is an attenuated live virus vaccine and has the potential for transmission to immunocompromised household contacts".
    If someone gets the flu Mist are they required to be quarantined? Do I have the right to know, according to the manufacturer, that the person sitting next to me on the bus was infected by a vaccine and can now get me sick? But if I get the vaccine I won't get infected right...........LOL. That is the absurdity of it all, that is the argument, get the vaccine.....even though it can make you sick and those you come in contact with, so you don't get sick, get the vaccine. ROFL.

    Gerhard Adam
    Do not read? or pay attention?

    No one is trying to take yours or anyone else's rights away.  Go for it.  Whatever you want to believe, go for it and "live long and prosper".  I really couldn't care less.

    I also don't understand why all this nonsense keeps bringing up the flu vaccine.  Don't get it if you don't want it.  Who cares?

    Your arguments are ridiculous and obviously originate from whatever marketing literature you've read, but certainly not based on scientific evidence (especially when it comes to something like flu vaccines).
    Especially since you believe they work so you must believe you and your family are protected from those that choose not to be vaccinated. I do not accept the risk associated with vaccines.
    Unfortunately you also don't accept the responsibility for such a decision.  Hopefully if you feel this way, you'll at least have the brains to stay home or keep your kids home when they do get ill.  Perhaps a consideration in case someone couldn't get vaccinated.
    Mundus vult decipi
    You know, my wife's mom is a social worker in nebraska. we had a doozy of a time explaining to her our reasons for not vaccinating. When we explained our families medical history, she didn't believe it. then we had our son, and went through the whole "to vaccinate or not" discussion with her.

    She undoubtedly sees in her work many benefit from vaccination. I also am sure that many people i know that have the DTaP vaccine haven't gotten tetanus or diptheria or pertussin because of it. I am not nor have ever said that they don't work to the benefit of MANY.

    When i showed my mother-in-law my familys medical records to ease her mind, there was a moment of what i though was clarity. Turns out, it was her mind trying to abolish the facts and records in front of her in favor of the years and years of instruction she had been given . Even though doctors at mayo clinic agreed with us, she could still see no possible negative to vaccinating.

    This year like all years, she got the flu shot. she had a pretty nasty reaction. Swelling and rash at injection site, nausea (never puked), fever/chills, etc. She thought she got the flu. Turns out it was just a reaction to the shot. a week later, she actually did get the flu. Of course, my wife asked her if she got the shot (she knew damn well, she gets one every year!), and my mother in law lost it, as if her own experience with the flu shot couldn't possibly be used to base future medical decisions on. But why not? because she can't open her eyes to what she experienced in real life, and instead choosed to go by what she "knows" from the literature and the experts.

    This is the mindset of many like you and the reason the flu shot is a topic of discussion that is relevant here.

    I can't speak for all anti-vaxxers, because i am not one. i believe that some vaccines are worrth it and some aren't. My son is getting DTaP because T isn't available by itself and can kill, while pertussing and diptheria seem to be along for the ride. Hib in forthcoming, as is the menegococcol something or other (don't have the schedule in front of me). You can rest assured he will not be getting MMR, vericella, or a few others simply because they are not worth of the risk associated with vaccines, especially in what seems to be a vaccine adverse family.

    I hope you can accept that. Now, if you don't mind, i have some shit to do while my son takes a nap. Good talking to you all (seriously, i love these conversations). If anyone want's to carry it on, my email is bubba_ky1982@yahoo.com

    peace

    Out of curiousity, why do you feel that the MMR is more dangerous than the DTaP? the pertussis part of the vaccine contains 100 times more immunlogical challenges than the Measles, Mumps, Rubella, Polio, Diptheria and Tetanus combined (the sum of which is 41).

    Actually, the problem is it is the people with brains who are choosing to opt out. Apparently this is all very sad, and we are terribly misled by terrible organisations that send us to medical articles instead of propaganda. I'm sorry but the official pamphlets lost me when they couldn't even draw a polio graph without manipulating the y axis so that the results looked better. That's when they lost me - it's a well known bullshit technique. And the more I look the more I see lies and misinformation masquerading as science.

    Belief of science and actual science are two different things. A scientist wont believe in evolution - he or she will question it, and most will be satisfied it's a pretty robust theory. Any true scientist will treat vaccines with the same scepticism. As a person I want to be able to take a vaccine and feel safe, but as someone who has perused many of the scientific studies - both pro and con - I cannot even remotely consider the current vaccine regimens safe, let along PROVEN to be safe and effective over either the medium or the long term, and in some cases - not even the short term.

    My advice is to get a science degree. Check out the pros and cons. Be aware that not all MMR, polio vaccines are created equal, learn quite a bit of history. Also it probably wouldn't hurt to learn about coeliac disease, Ataxia, general biochemistry, genetics....

    The really sad thing is that I'm a pygmy next to some of the anti/safe vax guys that have been discredited, and don't think Wakefeild is the first. Other very respected scientists have just stopped their research - dead. So you kind of have to look more to European countries and Japan, otherwise the data sets have been manipulated to hell and back.

    Any parent who does not vaccinate their children should be thrown in jail...

    The MMR has been shown to be the most reacted to vaccine through the VAERS government program. I don't where you got the immunological challenges info, and would really like to see the link or source, but if that is the case, thos 4100 immunological challenges that are in the pertussis are less tricky for the body to handle than the 41 in the MMR and DT part of the DTaP. And that is just the documented cases.

    you know, for thousands of years, doctors keep getting proven wrong about all the stuff they "know". I understand that they are doing what they think is best, but for some reason it's unthinkable to some people (like the jag-off that said "Any parent who does not vaccinate their children should be thrown in jail") that they may not be right. If someone told you that a safety on a gun was failproof and you saw it fail once, would you be willing to point it at yourself? what if you saw it twice? three times? I have had personal experience with severe reactions to vaccines in my family three times (one caused a deadly autoimmune response that miraculously hasn't proven fatal yet (another time doctors were wrong), one almost killed me when i was an infant, and one gave me an autoimmune disease), and yet people keep telling me that i am the crazy one simply because my experiences are counter to what most people experience. The odds of it happening are slim, i know, but they seem to be much higher in my family and i am guessing others with similar disposition in their genes to sensitivity to some of the vaccines.

    I am tired of trying to "prove" anything to anyone. I have never said vaccines should be banned, nor do i think that would be a good idea. The science is certaily for the use of vaccines to prevent many communicable diseases, whether they are real threats or just inconvieniences. All i have ever suggested is for anyone who thinks they know what is best for my child to put yourself in my shoes. I would LOVE if i could talk to every single hater out there saying i am being a bad parent. Come see what vaccines have done to me and my brother and possibly even my dad (developed diabetes even though he was in good shape...a few days after getting shots to go out of the country...notice the familial trend with vaccines triggering autoimmune disorders?), and you will find that we are all highly intelligent, successful, reasonable people who, regardless of what anyone tells us, will make decisions based on the risks and rewards and through our experiences. If you got hit by lightning when it stormed out a few times, would you believe a statistician that you will never get hit by lightning (statistically speaking)? Of course not. you would stay inside when it stormed!

    To force anyone to accept a medical procedure against their will is illegal, except in a state of emergency. To change the law to enforce you will on someone, no matter how well intentioned, should be illegal too. Too bad it already has been done! You now have to have a valid medical reason (in the state of iowa and the vast majority of others at least) to not get vaccinated. Religious still holds, but for how long? And philisophical is allowed in only a few states (argue philosophy is religion and you are denied exemption). Because of my family and my medical history, and the reactions we have shown to vaccines, our childs pediatrician has given us a medical exemption. If a DOCTOR seems to think that vaccines are harming us, how can you rightfully call ME the crazy one, or the one who thinks he knows more than the scientists. The reality that you all keep avoiding is that not a single doctor in the country in good conscience would sign a piece of paper claiming vaccines won't' hurt you. Because they can hur you! We simply want to keep the RIGHT to make the choice for our kids whether the risk of injury by a vaccine (especially in a family tree where it seems to defy the odds of happening quite frequently) is worth the risk of the disease.

    As for this jag-off that i mentioned saying i should go to jail....if you want to really help kids, lets put in jail all the lazy parents that let their kids watch 4 hours or more of TV, or the ones who don't read to their kids. Maybe the ones that feed them macaroni and cheese and let them have chips for a snack. You see where i am going here? maybe we should arrest them for letting their kids snowboard without helmets on, or skateboard in the street. Make it illegal for parents to smoke as it negatively affects children with the second hand smoke. If you really want to take away the choices of the parents about the welfare of their kids, take away those choices in areas that would truly make a national difference and affect the vast majority of kids in a positive way. It's people like you that argue a point without looking at the hipocrisy of your own life. I promise that you have done/will do things that are WORSE for your kids than not vaccinating. Who am i to tell you what to do with your family and their health/lives?

    Regards
    Kirk

    Put simply: don't let them inject you poison called vaccination, stay healthy & ignore the hateful, probably brain injured, vaccination victims (cannot grasp the bigger picture, only details they get "experts" in).

    omg what a dumb post! Offit is not an autism expert. Parents are experts of their child's type of autism. They lived it and continue to live it everyday. Please. Where was Paul Offit when my sister took her 2 yr old to the ER after the DTap? He is no expert on what happened to our children.