Washington State takes the next step towards socialism; Parents now have to get a doctors signature

I will gladly kill any official that tries to force my children to take these vaccines. My son became autistic because of these bull# drugs. And it will NOT happen again.

My kid is 13 months old. Never had one shot and has never been sick. His friend on the other hand has had every shot and is sick like once a week. Really weird. As far as the socialism thing I don't know.

Originally posted by mayabong
My kid is 13 months old. Never had one shot and has never been sick. His friend on the other hand has had every shot and is sick like once a week. Really weird. As far as the socialism thing I don't know.

Yeah, my autistic son (caused by the vaccines wouldn't ya know...) had to be pulled out of school EVERY week during his first year of school. With a fever of 103-104. All because he had his immunizations and vaccines done as required by the state. I tell you now, if they think they can do this to my other children, they will be meeting the hard end of my foot in their ass.

reply to post by Zarxx

I tell you now, if they think they can do this to my other children, they will be meeting the hard end of my foot in their ass.

i'm right there with you, but you do understand this isn't about forcing anyone, this is about ensuring the people refusing actually understand the risks, much like the waiver you sign gives up your right to sue if the child is harmed, this is merely an effort to ensure these people understand the risks, and to cover their butts so you can't come back and sue because they didn't tell you about the risks. It's mostly about making an informed decision.

Now, if your doctor refuses to sign that form, then you've got something to complain about.

during the h1n1 fiasco, 3 different friends of mine had their children vaccinated. All 3 ended up with seizures and extremely high fevers.

reply to post by Amaterasu

Mostly military - an unneeded thing that makes war suppliers billions. If We stopped spending money on war, We could feed, clothe and house everyOne on this planet easily and abundantly.

You probably thought I disagree with you, I don't. I actually totally agree with you, we should stop spending money on war and appropriate the funds for social services. I was only trying to explain that Socialism has nothing to do with what the OP was saying. As Socialism is just basically a system of "collective ownership", just like a "cooperative", and any country that collects taxes is a socialist country.

Your taxes does not just pay for your military, it also pays for other government services/programs, such as, firefighters, cops, public schools, roads, bridges, etc. There is nothing wrong with Socialism, but yes there is something wrong with the way we appropriate the funds.

YES it sucks that we are facing a dilemma whether we should have our kids vaccinated or not because WE CAN NOT even trust the people(Big Pharma) that says they are safe, and because of that I understand if any parents will refuse vaccinations for their kids. But then again, the government also has to ensure that the right of any person to live is protected, a parent cannot decide that for their children. There are those parents that refuse to even bring their children to the doctor when their child is already dying. But where do we draw the line, when is it necessary for the government to intervene? This is our dilemma.

English is not my native tongue, hope what I said even made sense.

reply to post by stumason


Obama is white, his BC prooved it. Sounds like you have been brainwashed by semantics

Originally posted by phishyblankwaters
reply to post by Zarxx

 

I tell you now, if they think they can do this to my other children, they will be meeting the hard end of my foot in their ass.

i'm right there with you, but you do understand this isn't about forcing anyone, this is about ensuring the people refusing actually understand the risks, much like the waiver you sign gives up your right to sue if the child is harmed, this is merely an effort to ensure these people understand the risks, and to cover their butts so you can't come back and sue because they didn't tell you about the risks. It's mostly about making an informed decision.

Now, if your doctor refuses to sign that form, then you've got something to complain about.

during the h1n1 fiasco, 3 different friends of mine had their children vaccinated. All 3 ended up with seizures and extremely high fevers.

It wouldn't surprise me if they started enforcing the vaccines in the near future; looking at the trend of things currently taking place. But that is good to know. Either way we have not been bringing our children to the doctor unless it is of dire need. And I hate to say that, considering I do in fact care about their health. It's amazing that my wife and I are literally afraid of going to a pediatrician. And they damned sure are sticking anything in me.

Once all this # settles, and I believe they have already proven that the immunizations cause autism, I will be suing the hell out of them for what they did to my son.

reply to post by phishyblankwaters


If you decide to take the doctors advice he should be made to sign a form whereas he can be sued if any adverse reactions happen. It would be interesting to see how many would cheer vaccines then.

reply to post by Zarxx


That really sucks and I'm really sorry about your kid. Id be very pissed as I'm sure you are.

reply to post by Zarxx


Vaccines do not cause autism, get with the times. The whole notion that vaccines are responsible for autism stems from the media fuelled frenzy sparked by Andrew Wakefield's discredited, retracted and possibly fraudulent 12 child case study linking MMR to autism.

Vaccines are not 100% guaranteed to prevent a disease in everyone who is vaccinated. According to the Institute of Child Health:

After one dose of MMR, approximately 90-95% of children are protected against measles, over 95% against rubella, and 85-90% against mumps. After two doses, almost 100% of people will be protected against all three diseases. Because the diseases are so infectious, it is necessary to have very high levels of immunity in the population to control the diseases. It is only possible to do this, if children receive two doses of the vaccine. For this reason, almost all countries, recommend two doses of the vaccine. Those countries that have a high uptake of two doses of MMR vaccine have been most successful at eliminating the diseases

If everybody in a population is vaccinated, the chances of contracting the disease is near zero. But the more people in a population who do not get vaccinated, the more the whole population is jeopardized. Imagine a robust individual who is not vaccinated and gets mumps. Before his parents keep him home from school he infects half his classmates, some have been vaccinated and are not affected. Some have not been vaccinated and they get the mumps. Most recover. Maybe one of the non-vaccinated dies. There may also be a child who was vaccinated but who is not very robust and she gets infected by several people, some of whom have been vaccinated and some who have not. Both can be carriers of the virus. The weak but vaccinated girl dies.

Does this mean the vaccine doesn't work? No. It means that if some people don't get vaccinated they can jeopardize those who do. On the other hand, if most people have been vaccinated, those in the population who haven't been vaccinated benefit from the actions of the others and get protection against the disease without being vaccinated. If too many people take this free-ride approach, the group suffers.

reply to post by westcoast

I pretty much agree with what you say, but i still do not see overwhelming negative aspects of the current "required" or "normal" vaccinations (mmr, dpt, tetanus). Yes, the flu vaccinations, the cervical cancer, *possibly* even chicken pox (but chicken pox SUCK), etc concern me if they also become "required," but it's a slippery slope to suggest that all vaccinations will become the norm, even if probable.

Just a personal note, i NEVER get flu vaccinations. EVER, because i am against it in principle, and they concern me the relative newness of them, and every other "new" vaccination they can concoct. I got the "normal" ones because i was required for school (at each level), and the only reason i didn't want to get those was because i hate needles. The shots themselves do not concern me.

There ARE vaccinations for safety and prevention, and there ARE shots to manipulate the public and keep them in check through fear, but lumping ALL of them into one or the other category is unwise, erroneous, incorrect and ignorant.

Originally posted by Amaterasu

Originally posted by Liquesence
These vaccinations exist for a reason (prevent spread of disease/infection),

Well, not really. That is what They TELL Us. But it's all about the money/power/energy.

They have concocted evil, dangerous stuff and tout it as "life-saving," when They make loads of money off it, and later, as people show symptoms of the poisoning, They can sell more "medicine" (that does further damage and requires further "medicine" They sell).

To a degree, yes. I agree that the whole flu vaccinations, and all of the other recent vaccinations, such as the cervical cancer one, mostly play into the money-making and fear scheme to which corporations and government are tied, but the vaccinations about which i am speaking are the ones necessary for school--such as MMR, and tetanus. These are usually offered FREE or nearly free, at health centers (at least where i live), and they are in place to prevent harm, they generally do not have adverse side effects, and they generally do more good than harm, even if they play into the power structure of the public school systems.

This does NOT, however, speak to the fact that they want to make previously listed vaccinations as required (flu, cervical, cancer, etc) which generally require a patient to pay an exorbitant amount.

But, they now play into the fear game, using minor *conditions* instead of true threats: i cannot recall the name, but there is this new commercial that plays the fear game with new parents (and i cannot recall the details). "You could give "X" to your child. We have a vaccine, get vaccinated." So new parents will more than likely freak out, "OMG, i could infect my baby, let's go get a vaccine!" Fear = Cha-Ching. I agree.

Until all these crazy vaccinations become mandatory, i would not shy away from all vaccinations. Look at polio, smallpox even.

And i have no problem with MMR or tetanus, because they, along with polio, have done far more good than harm.

But when we have to start getting vaccinations to be treated in a hospital or something, or they require is to take every new vaccine that comes on the market, then i will be concerned.

You can't lump all into the same category.

Originally posted by Griffo
reply to post by Zarxx

 

Vaccines do not cause autism, get with the times. The whole notion that vaccines are responsible for autism stems from the media fuelled frenzy sparked by Andrew Wakefield's discredited, retracted and possibly fraudulent 12 child case study linking MMR to autism.

Vaccines are not 100% guaranteed to prevent a disease in everyone who is vaccinated. According to the Institute of Child Health:

After one dose of MMR, approximately 90-95% of children are protected against measles, over 95% against rubella, and 85-90% against mumps. After two doses, almost 100% of people will be protected against all three diseases. Because the diseases are so infectious, it is necessary to have very high levels of immunity in the population to control the diseases. It is only possible to do this, if children receive two doses of the vaccine. For this reason, almost all countries, recommend two doses of the vaccine. Those countries that have a high uptake of two doses of MMR vaccine have been most successful at eliminating the diseases

If everybody in a population is vaccinated, the chances of contracting the disease is near zero. But the more people in a population who do not get vaccinated, the more the whole population is jeopardized. Imagine a robust individual who is not vaccinated and gets mumps. Before his parents keep him home from school he infects half his classmates, some have been vaccinated and are not affected. Some have not been vaccinated and they get the mumps. Most recover. Maybe one of the non-vaccinated dies. There may also be a child who was vaccinated but who is not very robust and she gets infected by several people, some of whom have been vaccinated and some who have not. Both can be carriers of the virus. The weak but vaccinated girl dies.

Does this mean the vaccine doesn't work? No. It means that if some people don't get vaccinated they can jeopardize those who do. On the other hand, if most people have been vaccinated, those in the population who haven't been vaccinated benefit from the actions of the others and get protection against the disease without being vaccinated. If too many people take this free-ride approach, the group suffers.

edit on 26/5/2011 by Griffo because: (no reason given)

Then explain to me, how my son was walking TALKING and learning at a normal pace, all the way up to the age of 2, went in for his shots, and now can no longer talk properly, does not look you in the eye, covers his ears, lines up his toys. My son was normal my friend. I still remember the day my wife woke up and was crying because he could no longer talk.

And ya know what? I am not the only one who shares this story. There are other moms who have experienced the same exact thing. If I find the link I will post many videos for your viewing pleasure.

And lets not forget that like 1 in 120 kids is autistic? Something is not right here if you ask me.

I understand your reasons for being upset with the system, but please don't confuse this with Socialism.

This has nothing to do with what kind of economic system the country follows. Socialism has been turned into the boogie man and has nothing to do with the issue at hand.

Fight on!

People fled oppressive countries for America.

Do as they did.

Move to a lesser oppressed land. There are plenty of States where people are still free yet:

www.hslda.org...

I live in California.
Two weeks ago I went to register my son for a charter school program. (He is starting kindergarten) and I was given a quick form to sign and put in a file. My son has a medical exemption but when I was filing his paperwork the secretary told me that I could just sign a form claiming a "personal beliefs exemption" if I didn't want to have to go to the doctor to get his medical exemption forms. They were very laissez-faire about it and actually seemed to want to avoid even discussing anything..just 'Here, sign this.."

The nurse spoke with me briefly and just stated that in an epidemic, my son would be excluded from school until the danger was over. I agreed and said the last place I would want him to be in an epidemic would be at school.

While I was there waiting to speak to someone about a summer program, another woman walked in that was signing her child up for kindergarten..the same age. She was filing her paperwork and the VERY SAME secretary was raking the woman over the coals about her son's shot record. It was so bizarre! She was demanding evidence for some missing vaccines on the vaccine form and castrating the woman for not having ALL the vaccines for her child and telling her she needed to make sure the kid makes them up by a certain date and she could not register him until they were made up, etc..
Intrigued, I went home and searched around on forums and such for other parents with similar experiences. Turns out it is pretty common for parents to be harassed by school personnel for an incomplete vaccination record. The reason is, that it makes their work much harder when they are filing the child's enrollment with the county. I was reading that some parents actually felt so harassed that they just went and filed a personal beliefs exemption and didn't even bother mentioning any vaccinations the child because of the harassment and pain in the a$$.

Originally posted by mayabong
reply to post by phishyblankwaters

 

If you decide to take the doctors advice he should be made to sign a form whereas he can be sued if any adverse reactions happen. It would be interesting to see how many would cheer vaccines then.

Interestingly, my child's pediatrician admitted to me that none of his three sons are vaccinated.

Actually (and give me a little time to peruse my favorites to find the articles) in San Diego County this past year, we had about an 87% pertussis vaccine failure rate. If you go back and look at the official San Diego County disease control website, they gave the ages, schools and vaccination status of the children affected by week. On an average week, during the "epidemic", you would have say, about 25 children affected. Of those 25 children, only 2 might have been listed as "non-vaccinated" or "missing doses". The other 23 or so (and like I said, this was the average..give or take some kids) would be listed as fully vaccinated. Yet weekly they would beg parents to make sure everyone in the family down to the family pet (I jest, of course..) was fully vaxxed up against pertussis!

Myself, I nearly died from the DTP (as it used to be called) in 1982. I was given a booster shot and ended up hospitalized with seizures and encephalitis AND pertussis. Years later, when I was 14 I was told that I did not have immunity to Measles and needed a booster since apparently the shots I had as a little girl were useless. I was given the shot in a doctor's office..walked outside, vomited, and fainted. My mom had to take me to the ER next door to get checked out. Fast forward years later when I was having my son in 2006. They ran titers on me when I was pregnant and surprise, surprise! No immunity to Measles!
So my question has been since then..what exactly did they inject in me that made me so ill several times but did nothing to protect me against disease??

Originally posted by Liquesence
To a degree, yes. I agree that the whole flu vaccinations, and all of the other recent vaccinations, such as the cervical cancer one, mostly play into the money-making and fear scheme to which corporations and government are tied, but the vaccinations about which i am speaking are the ones necessary for school--such as MMR, and tetanus. These are usually offered FREE or nearly free, at health centers (at least where i live), and they are in place to prevent harm, they generally do not have adverse side effects, and they generally do more good than harm, even if they play into the power structure of the public school systems.

Have you researched what is in even the ones We force upon the flesh of Our Children? You may want to review this link:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Truly, there is no way these are good for the flesh. Hygiene and good food are better than the jab at keeping epidemics at bay.

Fear = Cha-Ching. I agree.

But You don't think it's about the "cha-ching" to mandate these for all? (BTW, at least one "mercury-free" vaccine tested very positive for mercury..."

Until all these crazy vaccinations become mandatory, i would not shy away from all vaccinations. Look at polio, smallpox even.

I contend that better hygiene and diet were the major reasons those diseases were reduced.

And i have no problem with MMR or tetanus, because they, along with polio, have done far more good than harm.

Or so We are told. Do We have the data showing the effect of hygiene and diet on Human society? (And it is love of money - AKA the root of evil - that drives the makers of these drugs. Make them weak, drain their money selling them "medicines" and "vaccines," let 'em replace themselves and then die. Just sayin'.)

But when we have to start getting vaccinations to be treated in a hospital or something, or they require is to take every new vaccine that comes on the market, then i will be concerned.

You can't lump all into the same category.

Oh, I do believe You can.

Whats all the fuss about?
its just a traking bug!
and maybe a kill bug.

reply to post by Amaterasu


I am not ignorant, i am simply rational. There is no conclusive data on the harm of some vaccines, because data and studies can be organized and interpreted in a way to suit which side of the argument one prefers. Fact. Which is why studies are peer-reviewed and then overwhelmingly accepted into--or rejected from--scientific communities.

I know about the dangers of mercury, and even though mercury is toxic, the data as it related to vaccines is inconclusive. Period. You can believe whatever you want to believe, as people often believe some strange--untrue--things, and if you want to "contend" that hygiene and diet contributed to the wan of polio and smallpox and NOT the vaccines, well, i am not even going argue with such a contention.

I did not even bring up mercury into my posts, because that is not the point. Again i say, there is NO conclusive data about the dangers of vaccines, even if i DO think some are unnecessary as i mentioned in my previous posts. So perhaps you should read and think about what i have previously said, instead of jumping on the "all vaccines are bad, have you read this thread" boat, with the "mercury is toxic, vaccines contain mercury they must therefore be bad" logic. Do you eat ocean fish? Drink tap water that you have not personally filtered? Eat beef? Plenty of substances and heavy metals show up there, as well.

It is not ME that is lumping all vaccines into the same category, it is you, by implying that ALL are bad just because *some* might contain mercury, or that all are unnecessary just because some aren't. That's faulty logic, and has no basis in a rational argument.

I am simply trying to bring reason into the vaccine paranoia--the paranoia that says ALL vaccines are bad, which you seem to contend and imply--when the data are there, as it relates to effectiveness with some vaccines. You think that all of a sudden after the polio vaccine was given and it had, depending on the type of vaccine/polio, an 80 to 90+ percent effectiveness at reducing or stopping the spread and thereby essentially eradicating it? You think all those people the world over *suddenly* changed their diet and hygiene and THAT is the reason??


In this case it's not about "what we are told" it's about the data, unless you think that is manipulated too, to "make us believe" that they are effective when they aren't. It's all a big conspiracy.

C'mon, Get real.

And i will say it again, i am NOT for ALL vaccines, as i stated in my previous posts. Until they are proved overwhelmingly beneficial (like POLIO, SMALLPOX)... And i do not see how hygiene or diet can stop ALL diseases, that's just being naive...

Believe what you want, though.