Vaccinate or not?

[aztek]

A study from the 1990s has come to light, proving that compared to unvaccinated children, vaccinated children were more likely to suffer from asthma, eczema, ear infections, hyperactivity and many other chronic conditions. Furthermore, the study identified that there was a ten-fold increase in the incidence of tonsillitis in the children who were vaccinated, and a total lack tonsillectomy operations among the children who were unvaccinated.

In September 2011, German researchers carrying out a longitudinal study surveyed a total of 8000 unvaccinated children from the ages of 0 –19. As with the New Zealand study, researchers collected their data by conducting a survey using questionnaires. [2]

Results showed that vaccinated children were up to five times more likely to suffer from a variety of diseases and disorders than unvaccinated children.

Dr. Andreas Bachair continued her report by stating that their study found the prevalence of sinusitis, warts, skin problems and middle ear infections were also much lower in the unvaccinated children, as were the cases of diabetes and epilepsy.

She went on to say that the results demonstrated that the prevalence of many conditions in the unvaccinated children were also significantly lower.

http://vactruth.com/...c9c23-408181985

Edited February 27, 2014 by aztek

[Eldorado]

Survey administered by German anti-vaccine Homeopath spectacularly backfires.

http://scienceblogs....ed-survey-back/

(plus... the OP cited article spells the doctor's name incorrectly and changes his gender!... lol)

Edited February 27, 2014 by Eldorado

[Rafterman]

So a New Zealand anti-vaxx group (http://en.wikipedia....areness_Society) and a German anti-vaxx homeopathic "doctor" surveyed parents of unvaccinated children and found a conclusion that agrees with their bias.

Wow, that's freaking amazing.

Here's a pretty good analysis of "Dr." Bachmair's (misspelled Bachair in the OP's article) ANONYMOUS INTERNET SURVEY and its faulty results:

http://scienceblogs....ed-survey-back/

And to which peer reviewed journals have these 20 year old and 3 year old studies been submitted? Might I suggest they look at this one: http://www.jimmunol.org/

Edited February 27, 2014 by Rafterman

[Guest]

Without a direct reference to the original study this is not a very useful piece of journalism as it is always critically important to go to the original source when dealing with such contentious research.

Br Cornelius

[Guest]

Raftman and Elderado thanks for clarify that, and its exactly as I suspected and the reason why original peer reviewed references are essential.

Another fail for the Anti-vaccine lobby.

Br Cornelius

[+OverSword]

Shouldn't this be in the UK/Europe forum?

[Ashotep]

Even if there are some problems with vaccines I'm sure getting polio and other diseases they protect against would be much better, not.

[aztek]

Might I suggest they look at this one: http://www.jimmunol.org/

so you bashing the doctors in this study and claim they are biased, than you link to "better info site" that is has opposite bias. american assosiation of immunologists, and that supposed to be credible and unbiased???

Survey administered by German anti-vaccine Homeopath spectacularly backfires.

http://scienceblogs....ed-survey-back/

(plus... the OP cited article spells the doctor's name incorrectly and changes his gender!... lol)

so something posted by a guy named orac on some blog is suddenly credible ??? who is he? what is his credentials?

Edited February 27, 2014 by aztek

[Guest]

Shows us the peer reviewed original so we can judge for ourselves. It really simple - if you want to stand behind this let us in on the research paper so we can check if the research method and conclusions are credible. Lets cut out the Journo musings and go straight to the source. Come on - put up or shut up.

Br Cornelius

[aztek]

how about the same from a guy who actuially makes vaccines?

http://www.naturalne...pv_vaccine.html

Edited February 27, 2014 by aztek

[aztek]

..........

Br Cornelius

how about you show me unbiased study that contradicts claims in article.

Come on - put up or shut up.

Edited February 27, 2014 by aztek

[aztek]

how about another makes of vaccines, tells the same story

http://tv.naturalsoc...less-dangerous/

Edited February 27, 2014 by aztek

[aztek]

http://www.childhoodshots.com/Influenza-Vaccine-for-Senior-Citizens-Proves-Useless-s/253.htm

[Guest]

how about you show me unbiased study that contradicts claims in article.

Come on - put up or shut up.

You don't understand your obligation to support your claim with the original research do you.

There is a whole sheaf of studies disproving this, all we want is the proof of what you claim - and don't try to shift it back onto me for asking a perfectly reasonable question.

Journalist articles just don't cut it - no matter how many you supply. Peer review is the quality control of science.

Br Cornelius

Edited February 27, 2014 by Guest

[aztek]

Vaccines Expert Warns Studies are Useless

Edited February 27, 2014 by aztek

[Guest]

Vaccines Expert Warns Studies are Useless

Who made her a VACCINE EXPERT ? Calling yourself something doesn't make it true.

I suspect you can't support your claim because you never saw the original research.

Br Cornelius

[pallidin]

My 2-cent's...

I believe in vaccinations, my last one was about 2 months ago for our current flu season in the US.

For whatever reason I have no side-effect problems, but, some people do. My wife, for example. She supposedly had a bad reaction from a shot many years ago, and will not do this to this day.

But for myself(and for those I'm around), I'm glad I did it.

[pallidin]

@ aztek...

All is good. You brought-up a topic that I think is worthy of discussion. No need for a "good day", in my opinion.

[Scrunchkruckets]

Dirty Diseased ***** Contaminated Smelly Chemicals in brand new fresh blood.....no thanks

[Almagest]

Dirty Diseased ***** Contaminated Smelly Chemicals in brand new fresh blood.....no thanks

Your body is made of *gasp* chemicals.

And you can't be too healthy if you're dead from Measles or Mumps, can you?

Edited February 27, 2014 by Almagest

[Lilly]

Ok, enough with the bickering and name calling. Try politely asking others to link to research.

[Almagest]

I'd just like to add:

"The data was collected from parents with vaccine-free children via an internet questionnaire by vaccineinjury.info and Andreas Bachmair, a German classical homeopathic practitioner. The website is not a pretty one (including Google ads for vaccines) but the actual data is what counts."

From one of the original articles sources:

http://healthimpactnews.com/2011/new-study-vaccinated-children-have-2-to-5-times-more-diseases-and-disorders-than-unvaccinated-children/

That is not scientific. Firstly it doesn't mention parents of vaccinated children taking part of the survey. That alone is a red flag. Secondly it was conducted via internet survey done by a website called Vaccine Injury. People with vaccinated children without health problems would probably never find themselves on that site and wouldn't be partaking in their survey. Third it involved a Homeopath. The conflict of interests is immediately clear - he wants people to stop buying medicine and start buying his water pills.

Of course you're going to dismiss all of what I say, because I demand that the studies meet a certain level of scientific rigour. I get it, science is just one big conspiracy and we're all sheeple for listening to scientists. But it's not a coincidence that people live longer on average after the Scientific Revolution than before. I'm not even a scientist and I can recognise when people are talking bunkum, and in the article you originally posted they're doing just that. I certainly know if I handed in an essay as poorly sourced as that article back in High School I wouldn't have received very good marks for it.

[Sundew]

You have to weigh the risks of possible and unproven (in many cases) side effects with the very real possibility of acquiring a dangerous or deadly disease. Right now in California there are 24 (? uncertain of the number) of children coming down with polio like symptoms. While this may not be polio, polio is a dreadful life-changing disease that children used to get during summer months that could cripple them, leave then in an iron lung for life and do other nasty things to them. To not vaccinate your child against polio because they might become hyperactive from the vaccine is a risk too terrible to contemplate. The same is true for other dangerous childhood and adult diseases and for those traveling to third world countries. You really had better weight the risk of not being vaccinated in some circumstances.

[Imaginarynumber1]

The truth is that it is simply dangerous to your children and to others to not get vaccinations.

You don't want you or your kids vaccinated? Fine, but you better keep your polio riddled family the hell away from the rest of society.

[aztek]

Of course you're going to dismiss all of what I say,

yes i will, untill you show any evidence that article, along with 2 more writen by people that actually make the vaccine. are wrong. and once again, there are plenty of references in my links.

please contradict those numbers and finding with your numbers and findings. not just discredit them because they were written by someone biased.

actually in article written by vaccine maker says that hydgene, and sanitation play larger role in keeping desises at bay. simple washing hands by doctors before seeing patients in early 1900 decreased outbrakes, and increased survivabuility, before vaccines and antibiotics were ever invented.

Edited February 27, 2014 by aztek