Ohio HB 536 and SB 381 requires children in day care to be vaccinated (allows exemption for religiou

a reply to: [post=18680214]justin366[/post
The vaccination is not just about individual level of protection. If all the kids are vaccinated to the best level they can be there is less chance of the virus being introduced or spreading.

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: signalfire
Just so I am clear are you saying that your children gave others the virus through shedding post vaccination? If so can I ask what virus this was for as my understanding is that the reason they wouldn't tell you is that for almost all vaccinations the risk of this is so small to be practically non existent.

It's my understanding that measles is one of the most likely suspects but the fact is, we may not know. No, I don't know if one of my kids gave someone else a disease in this manner. How would anyone? There's an exposure and days later, someone you may not even know starts to get ill... But it's highly likely that the disease outbreaks in vaccinated children (apparently not well enough vaccinated) may very well be exposure to peer groups who have just been vaccinated and are shedding live virus... far more likely than getting the disease from an exposed child who hasn't been vaccinated by awake and aware parents who aren't complacent about dropping off a sick child to school or daycare.

People like to think vaccination means 'bullet proof'. Like they've done all they can now as parents. It's hardly that simple, especially with a corporate-profit driven medical system, not one that likes to look at things from the point of view of reality.

BTW, anyone who didn't click on my above link 'Shawn Siegel In Memoriam' I DARE YOU... Take a look at those babies, look at the stats and then tell me you're willing to take those chances, especially in an infant. Studies have been done showing that post vaccination, children are far more likely to have respiratory pauses that put them under threat of crib death; but you'll never hear the docs that administer these shots admit to a connection.

a reply to: signalfire
Not sure I understand why you think that is more likely to be infection from shedding. For the majority of vaccines I don't even think this is possible.
I have stated over and over vaccinations aren't 100% effective that is why it is important for as many people to be vaccinated as possible.
Do you have a link to a study showing that vaccinated children are far more likely to have respiratory pauses resulting in crib death?
Any decent doctor will acknowledge that vaccines can have side effects but on balance much much better to be vaccinated than not.

a reply to: signalfire

Way to many what ifs in the category for me. I have a cousin who has some issues that presented and shakin baby syndrome. After a massive investigation and lawsuit I'm pretty sure its still unsettled but some one shaking him is still not for sure the cause.

Apparently there is some crazy genetic disorder that presents in just astoundingly low cases that could be responsible... And for some reason this is the one that's getting blamed in officially.

AND vaccinations can cause some pretty severe wire crossage in the brain. Since the incident they have met so many people with similar stories... And some the story started right after some vaccinations. No proof or anything its just really suspect.

Also.. The gardisil shot.. How can we ever trust after that? That poor backwards walking girl, how is she now adays? If I recall she could jog and run forward but her brain spasms if she tries to walk... But she can walk backwards just fine.. Sounds like hell

this is probably the most civil discussion on vaccines ive ever participated in to date on ATS.

bravo to both sides.

rare moment for me.

I have heard the horror stories about vaccinations and was hesitant to get one.

I broke and got one..turns out I was worried for nothing. The thing is..I believe vaccinations are good for people but there are also those people out there who have negative reactions to them.

I think how a vaccination work depends on the person.

So both sides of the argument would be correct.

I like this part.

(C)(1) A child is not required to be immunized against a disease specified in division (B) of this section if the child's physician, advanced practice registered nurse, or physician assistant certifies in writing any of the following: (a) That immunization against the disease is medically contraindicated for the child; (b) That the parent or guardian has declined to have the child immunized against the disease because they think they know better (see Dunning-Kruger-appendix vi); (c) That immunization against the disease is not medically appropriate for the child's age. (2) In the case of influenza, a child is not required to be immunized against the disease if the child's physician, advanced practice registered nurse, or physician assistant certifies in writing that the seasonal vaccine is not available.

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

I think that by presenting the article first without my commentary that it may have helped lead to a more fruitful discussion. I'll be happy to share my thoughts.


I think that vaccines can be beneficial when used sparingly against specific threats. I don't believe that vaccinating almost every child for a huge variety of diseases that they probably will never encounter (even if we stopped vaccinating altogether) makes sense for anyone but the makers of vaccines.

I also believe that advances in hygiene and medical technology have had as much to do with the decline of certain diseases as vaccinating. Look at diseases like typhoid fever and scarlet fever, which have no vaccine yet are virtually wiped out in the developed world.

With the skyrocketing rates of autism and vaccines known to cause harm in a small percentage of children, I believe that my child will be at less overall risk in life if I choose to not vaccinate her. When she is of age, she can decide what she wants to do from there.

Final thought: how many cases of almost eradicated illnesses are caused by vaccine shedding? I can't say. I do know that the oral polio vaccine was taken off the market in the US because of shedding.

a reply to: sdubya

a reply to: sdubya
The main benefits to vaccination come from having almost ever child/adult vaccinated. The reason that they are unlikely to come into contact with many of the viruses is that mass vaccination has made the spread of these viruses more difficult.
The increase in diagnosis of autism has no connection to vaccination.
For the majority of vaccinations there is no evidence that infection through shedding has ever occurred. I believe the exceptions being oral polio(which you have correctly stated was withdrawn) and the puffer style flu vaccine. (going from memory here if anyone more up to date can confirm)
There are possible complications with vaccines but overall outcomes mean you are much better having your children vaccinated than not.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

The reason that they are unlikely to come into contact with many of the viruses is that mass vaccination has made the spread of these viruses more difficult.

I think that in the past this might have been true, but may not be the case now.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

The increase in diagnosis of autism has no connection to vaccination.

None that we currently can connect for certain, but autism rates are going up and we don't know why. I'd rather not take that chance.

originally posted by: ScepticScot
There are possible complications with vaccines but overall outcomes mean you are much better having your children vaccinated than not.

I think that this is a key place where we disagree.

a reply to: sdubya
We know that immunisation levels drop below a certain level outbreaks occur. If we successfully eradicate serious childhood viruses then we could stop vaccinating for them.
As there is no evidence to connect rise in autism diagnosis with vaccines why believe there is a risk. As this has now been widely researched we can probably rule out a vaccine connection more than any other possible cause.
The problem with opposing vaccines is that your decisions can adversely affect the health of other peoples children.

originally posted by: sdubya

originally posted by: ScepticScot

The reason that they are unlikely to come into contact with many of the viruses is that mass vaccination has made the spread of these viruses more difficult.

I think that in the past this might have been true, but may not be the case now.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

The increase in diagnosis of autism has no connection to vaccination.

None that we currently can connect for certain, but autism rates are going up and we don't know why. I'd rather not take that chance.

originally posted by: ScepticScot
There are possible complications with vaccines but overall outcomes mean you are much better having your children vaccinated than not.

I think that this is a key place where we disagree.

If we stop vaccinating against certain diseases they will return.
Measles was nearly eradicated in the US a few years ago but due to the drop in vax rates it's on the rise again. Same in the UK.

Going by the available research I'd suggest that it's greater than 99% certain that vaccines don't cause autism.
www.iflscience.com...

Going by your logic, the sales of organic food are increasing at the same rate as autism.
So don't eat that organic kale. I mean, how can you take that chance?
i.kinja-img.com...


The chances of being harmed by vaccines is minuscule, almost none.
The chances of being harmed by the diseases they prevent are several factors higher.
There really is no argument nor any room for rational disagreement.

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: sdubya
We know that immunisation levels drop below a certain level outbreaks occur. If we successfully eradicate serious childhood viruses then we could stop vaccinating for them.

We still vaccinate for polio, despite the fact that there have been no reported cases in the United States for quite some time. CDC shows currently only 279 reported cases world-wide so far this year.

"According to global polio surveillance data from November 12, 2014, 279 polio cases have been reported to date in 2014 from Afghanistan, Cameroon, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Iraq, Nigeria, Pakistan, and Syria. In 2013, a total of 416 polio cases were reported from the following countries: Afghanistan, Cameroon, Ethiopia, Kenya, Nigeria, Pakistan, Somalia, and Syrian Arab Republic."

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: sdubya
As there is no evidence to connect rise in autism diagnosis with vaccines why believe there is a risk. As this has now been widely researched we can probably rule out a vaccine connection more than any other possible cause.
The problem with opposing vaccines is that your decisions can adversely affect the health of other peoples children.

We don't know WHY autism rates have been going up. Until we have a good idea as to how to prevent autism spectrum disorders, I'm not taking any chances with my children. I believe that vaccine injuries are seriously underreported and that the risks of not vaccinating are grossly overplayed.

We all want what's best for our kids. I have just lost the ability to trust the current medical establishment.

a reply to: Pardon?

I didn't argue that correlation = causation, I argued that we don't know WHY autism and related disorders are increasing. There are probably multiple factors involved. Until we have a good understand of autism, I'm not taking even a 1% chance.

As far as measles go, it's still pretty much eradicated in the US. The odds of getting measles in 2014 are around one in 500,000. The odds of dying were pretty much nil (no deaths out of 600 cases).

Yes, there are other, more scary diseases out there than measels. I'm not 100% against vaccines for a select few, but I believe that a one size fits all program does more harm than good.

a reply to: sdubya
My understanding is that it is far from settled that incidence of autism is rising. Diagnosis of autism has certainly risen but that could be as much to do with better diagnosis.
As we don't know what causes autism then there is no way to avoid the risk? If someone told you it was caused by too much sunlight and someone else by too little what would you do?
Avoiding something that has been researched and found not to cause autism seems pointless when the benefits are clearly documented.

originally posted by: sdubya
a reply to: Pardon?

I didn't argue that correlation = causation, I argued that we don't know WHY autism and related disorders are increasing. There are probably multiple factors involved. Until we have a good understand of autism, I'm not taking even a 1% chance.

As far as measles go, it's still pretty much eradicated in the US. The odds of getting measles in 2014 are around one in 500,000. The odds of dying were pretty much nil (no deaths out of 600 cases).

Yes, there are other, more scary diseases out there than measels. I'm not 100% against vaccines for a select few, but I believe that a one size fits all program does more harm than good.

Ah right.
We don't know what causes autism and we know that vaccines DON'T cause autism so what exactly else are you avoiding so as not to "take a chance" with autism?
Are you avoiding genetics as that seems to be the main culprit?

As for the measles, a few years ago the numbers were in the single figures.
If the vax rates continue to dip then they'll increase exponentially.
And great, there's been no deaths. There have been quite a few having to have extended hospital stays though with pneumonia etc. which could have easily been prevented.
But no-one's died so that's okay.

And you said the magic word, you "believe".
Come back when you know and can demonstrate that knowledge. A belief's not worth much in this respect.