Originally posted by beenupsince2007
As a mother of 3 girls who decided NOT to vaccinate my 3rd child I think this is a bunch of garbage...
I included a page from a CDC report showing your over dramatic increase. I have noticed a difference between my 2 older children and my youngest and will not change my decision period! Have you looked up the stats on the CDC website for all of the adverse affects from these wonderful vaccines?[/img]
In Arizona, the median increase is even greater than the mean increase, and they do look at both so I think you're making up this "deception" claim:
Originally posted by Elliot
I agree with you completely. WE are continually told that we are living longer and longer. I don't see it personally and figures can be made to lie.
Average figures are a means of deception. We should be looking at the Median figures and NOT the average.
Originally posted by Titen-Sxull
reply to post by Thunder heart woman
It is true that there is some risk associated with vaccines. Some people do come down with mild versions of the disease they are being vaccinated against and a very tiny percentage can have allergic reactions to the vaccine. However all of these risks are minute compared to the benefits. Many diseases that once killed children in droves have been all but wiped out thanks to vaccinations, unfortunately thanks to anti-vax panic they are making a come back.
Getting your child vaccinated is far less of a risk than not doing it, but human beings are quick to forget the harsh realities of the diseases these vaccines all but wiped out over the course of just a few generations.
Do not place the life of your child in the hands of a stranger simply because they come dressed in a suit with a piece of paper on their wall.
Wealth is a factor, but did you look at the figures in the link I posted?
Originally posted by Elliot
Vaccination is not the problem but poverty.
Yes wealth is a factor, but I think some people tend to overstate the effect of wealth.
Disparities in income have risen substantially between rich and poor countries, and between rich and poor states in India. But disparities in life expectancy have shrunk, sometimes dramatically. In 1950, life expectancy in India (31 years) was less than half that in the US (68 years). But by 2005, India (64 years) was not far behind the US (77 years)…In terms of per capita income, the richest major state, Maharashtra is four times as rich as Bihar. Yet, life expectancy in Bihar (61 years) is only slightly behind that of Maharashtra (66.4 years). Indeed, Bihar is almost on par with the national life expectancy of 62.7 years.
Originally posted by mb2591
reply to post by Griffo
Source not needed it came from my doctor think he'd make that up?
Originally posted by Revolution9
Originally posted by Griffo
reply to post by Revolution9
Illnesses such as those you have just stated, IMO, are natural.
So are a lot of diseases. Do you suppose we should just avoid going the dentist when we get tooth decay?
It is my sincere belief that that these illnesses are necessary as part of the development of a child's immune system.
The immune system doesn't really work that way