It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
By now, many parents in America have heard of the Hannah Poling court case. They know the government has acknowledged that vaccines contributed to autism in at least one little girl from Georgia. Understandably, they are worried, and they want answers.
But instead of frank talk from leading health officials, their concerns are being met with stonewalling, denial and misinformation.
By refusing to address what really happened to Hannah — by commanding parents to settle down and adhere to the nation's rigid immunization regime — officials will only drive people away from vaccines in anxiety-ridden droves.
But what if we could test children for underlying conditions that might increase their risk of vaccine injury and autism? And what if we allowed those at risk to slightly delay and spread out their shots?
Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Originally posted by Fromabove
The year they got the flu vaccine wrong and had to destroy the whole lot... a funny thing happened. Very few people got the flu....
The best method for protection is to not touch the infected person.
Have you any epidemiological data to support that claim?
Many dangerous diseases are communicable, which means that you don't have to touch anyone to to contract a pathogen. They are airborne.
Disease is often spread by cross-contamination.
In the case of childhood diseases, it is difficult, if not impossible, to isolate children from contagious disease because of the very nature of children, especially considering how many children spend some forty or more hours a day in child care centers.
So far, no one has present one single cogent argument against vaccinations.
Originally posted by americandingbat
Originally posted by realshanti
Those who are vaccinated have a good shot at not getting the disease but they are not 100% immune...
Otherwise why would it be such a big deal that a few un-vaccinated people got the measles - if vaccinations meant 100% immunization no one would give a rats a$$ about the 63 kids that contracted the disease because they were not vaccinated...
Well, their families might.
And then there's the children between the age of 6 months (around when they lose the immunity they got from their mother) and one year (when they are eligible for vaccination).
Edit to say my point more straightforwardly:
If an 8-month old is taken to the emergency room for some unrelated issue, and is exposed there to measles from the kid in the next chair who was eligible for vaccination but unvaccinated, that 8-month old and their family will probably care.
[edit on 24-8-2008 by americandingbat]
Originally posted by wolfmanjack
Its back because people from out of the country are bringing it into the states.
Its being transplanted from other countries to the US.
Asbestos sufferers have condemned James Hardie for delaying payouts to victims while it fights with the tax office to ensure payouts are tax deductible.
FORD Australia has lodged an appeal against a landmark decision to award a former mechanic $840,000 compensation for exposure to asbestos when he worked at Ford car dealerships.
Paul “For Profit” Offit, is the leading vaccine promoter in the US. Dr. Paul Offit is also one of the patent holders of the rotavirus vaccine (Patent Application number 353547), and the recipient of a $350,000 grant from Merck for its development. Additionally, he is a consultant to Merck Pharmaceuticals.