CONFUSED PARENTS TO BLAME FOR FALLING VAX RATES

From ABC Go, the full article is HERE.

Fewer children in the United States are getting the immunizations they need, putting themselves and others at much greater risk of contracting and spreading vaccine-preventable diseases, new research from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention suggests.

Here's the new spin. You, silly parents, are too confused to know how to create a vaccine schedule.  That's why you're out of compliance. Last I checked, the AAP vaccine schedule is not an a la carte menu.

Most parents go to a well visit and the nurse tells them what shots are due at the visit.   So how are parents "confused" about which vaccine a child needs, how many doses, etc?

According to infectious disease experts, the most obvious explanation for noncompliance is confusion over which vaccine a child needs, how many doses and in what intervals.

With about 10 recommended vaccinations for children around age 2, almost all of which require two or more doses within a specified time period, Luman believes that some parents might find it difficult to keep it all sorted out.

How about this explanation: Parents are scared to death that there are too many vaccines administered too young. Parents have learned that vaccines are loaded with chemicals they'd prefer not to inject into their children.

Now, it's up to the scientists and doctors to find out if we're right. Don't call us confused, CDC and AAP. Call us educated consumers. Blame your lack of action for non-compliance.

Comments

[Terri Lewis]

Confused parents?

Uninformed parents?

Actually, many still are. So--in direct contradiction of what I wrote earlier on this thread--I wrote a letter to the Cincinnati Enquirer to see if they might possibly let parents know that biomedical treatment exists. Because some don't know it.

I was even nice about it, so maybe it will get printed.

If not, I will get the word out in every other way I can think of.

Terri

[Unforgiving Critters]

From that article -

"Measles is a highly contagious disease that can cause a rash, high fever, cough, runny nose and red watery eyes. It also can cause diarrhea, ear infections, pneumonia, brain injury, seizures and death."

Is this what happens when you "get" the measles? THIS is what happened to my son after he "GOT" the MMR!! Seemingly, you don't take the shot or take the shot, it seems to have the same result. Darn them measles.

Hmmm I wonder what the CDC and the AAP will have to say about that now. Let me guess. I am guessing its going to be the age old mantra - "We don't know." We have to do research and we need to find this autism gene. We are looking and looking and looking...

Methinks the diseases are a lot smarter than we give them due credit for. They are as good as Osama bin Laden, we simply cannot find them. You see, they hide so well. I think the problem is that they cannot be bought, money does not matter to them. They merely want to hide so that they can get even and strike when you are least expecting it. They are an entity that cannot be "spun" and they are therefore the deadliest of all. They sure don't like to be messed with and they are very, very unforgiving. They can bring the best of us down to our knees weeping, crying, and begging for mercy. Just ask us, we know.

[Josh Day]

This was inevitable. Check out the fear-mongering swill below... and yep, they end on an Offit note.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-vaccine2-2008may02,0,6944471.story

[Gatogorra]

This harem' scarem' press release is no good unless there are outbreaks. Like nitro and glycerin, there probably can't be a sufficient explosion of public panic to justify a crackdown on the unvaxed without the combination of prediction and event. My question is how the outbreaks are going to be pulled off.

[Sakura]

They ARE laying the groundwork for something else for sure.

Most parents who fully vaccinate do so by following what the doctor's office tells them to do.

They are shifting even more blame and responsibility on parents, while doctors, insurance companies, the state and federal government and vaccine manufacturers go about their business.

This is spin, and a set up.

My prediction? A few weeks/months from now, the CDC is going to make a big announcement and they are going to revise the childhood vaccination schedule, and say that they are doing it due to parental pressure, that they are taking the needs and requests of parents seriously. They'll revise the schedule not because of scientific evidence, but out of the goodness of their hearts and consideration for parents.

In doing so, they will once again shift the blame, responsibility and focus away from the vaccine manufacturers and the powers that be that got us here in the first place. Then, down the line when there is a big outbreak of some vaccine "preventable" disease, they can pin it on the parents. The CDC will come out smelling like roses on all fronts.

[Garbo]

I found this to be really a curious press release as well. Seems to me they are laying groundwork here for something, just can't figure out what. Current schedule is CONFUSING because there are SO MANY that have to be given at an EXACT TIME or they WON'T WORK. Are they trying to do damage control in advance of requiring the MMR booster? Are they going to try to say that "too early" vaccinations are the cause of some of the outbreaks of disease among the vaccinated, not that the vaccines don't work? Are they trying to erase the admission that Gerberding made that doctors and parents should be in charge of each child's schedule? I'd love to believe that they are going to pare back the schedule to eliminate this imaginary confusion (i.e. they now realize the rates are getting so low they have to do something, but they can't/won't admit that vaccines cause injury so they have to say they cause confusion), but given the track record I'm not holding my breath...

[Jackasses]

"Is it me, or does it seem as though the point of all this is smoke and mirror tricks so parents don't think for themselves?"

The simple truth is THIS - they don't know SH*T and I am completely and utterly sick of them.

[apple_m]

In the UK we have this story
"traveling soccer fans risk catching measles in Europe"
or "and health chiefs fear measles outbreak"

[Jennifer Flinton]

This tactic by the CDC terrifies me. It reminds me of how the Nazis swung public opinion against the Jews by leading the average citizen to believe Jews were responsible for all their economic woes. The CDC is trying to pit the average parent against us autism parents by insinuating that we are endangering their children by choosing not to vaccinate ours. Despicable.

[Adrienne]

First of all, it seems that the CDC sent out the same correspondence to the mainstream media outlets, as this same "parents are confused" piece also ran on Nightly News with Brian Williams last night. Although each station reported slightly different info, both featured Elizabeth Luman of the CDC, "reminding" parents that every child "must have all recommended doses." What was INCREDIBLY interesting, in my opinion, was the little blurb printed on ABC's site: *But mis-timing vaccination doses is also a problem. The government has an exact schedule for when each shot needs to be given. But the study found that one in twelve children got at least one vaccination too early in life. "If you give them the vaccine at the wrong time, their immune system may not be developed enough to respond to that vaccine, and they may not develop immunity," Danziger-Isakov said.*

Ok. Danziger-Isakov, who apparently represents from the Cleveland Clinic, here's my first question: WHO IN THE WORLD DECIDED THAT THE FIRST FOUR HOURS OF LIFE WERE SUFFICIENT FOR AN INFANT TO "ADEQUATELY RESPOND" TO HEPATITIS B AND ALL ITS POISONOUS FIXINS? Where are the years of research on this and all the documented evidence that all these children are "just fine?"

I'll throw him my background - my firstborn had all 32 shots, including two bombers of Fluzone, complete with thimerosal, after which we lost him COMPLETELY for almost ten months. After his diagnosis, I was ALL OVER his vaccine schedule (which, interestingly, I was never confused about; I just blindly followed the herding (pun intended) of my very mediocre pediatrician). Later on, I discovered that all of his six month vaccines were given two weeks too early, and a PHN at our county Health Department (I wanted an objective and anonymous opinion) assured me that a school nurse might insist on him actually being given additional boosters! At any rate, he's currently in recovery and making trememdous progress. Last week, he lost his diagnosis of moderate autism, in fact. My second born is seven months old, has had six vaccines, all at least 30-45 days apart, and only those my husband and I are too worried about to sleep. He is already babbling, almost crawling, and actually starting to wave. Our pediatrician has told us that he feels very comfortable that our second born is "done" with vaccines for now (we may discuss boosters YEARS from now), as two doses of each of the three vaccines is sufficient for immunity at this point - not to mention that if you look at titres later on in adolescence, you will see that immunity certainly is not what it should be for lots of these kids (even though they've been dosed four and sometimes five times. The bottom line is that myself, my husband, and our pediatrician feel that the risk of ASDs and the host of other developmental and biomedical problems far outweigh the "imminent risk of death unless!" we give all these vaccines.
My apologies for the length of that. My final thought for our doctor friends "in charge" is this, in response to the last comment on ABC Go: *Pediatricians say giving vaccines earlier than recommended is often done out of convenience.* Um, I'm unclear here. On the first page we were told that this schedule has been developed based on strict guidelines, and our children have to have them at these specific times (although a few weeks ago our girl Julie G. at CDC said we could start working with our peds on a more flexible schedule). So the "peds giving shots earlier than recommended for convenience..." um, convenience for whom? They just trapped themselves, in my opinion, as "they" just told us that we should NOT give vaccines earlier (or later) than recommended. Is it me, or does it seem as though the point of all this is smoke and mirror tricks so parents don't think for themselves?

[MinorityView]

The story underlying the story--they are going to use this data to push vaccine registries. And on the children getting vaccines to early--they know perfectly well that it rarely makes any difference in immunity if kids get them too late, so they had to mention the too early bit to add some significant fearmongering to the story. Most unusual for a child to get a vaccine early and if it does happen it is because of an error. And then they wonder why people don't trust them?

[Kelli Ann Davis]

"Instead of an entire education campaign to raise awareness of the importance of getting all of your immunizations, doctors can just look up the patients who are not up-to-date and call them up to remind them."

Oh goody-goody gumdrops. I can't wait.

What's next? Docs making house calls again?

[Desperate]

"Right now, they're just doing a horrible job with the "cover up"."

I think desperate times call for desperate measures. I think they might be laying the foundation for a future reduced vaccine schedule since they can claim that this is really not working all that well. It *might* be better to get more compliance from a smaller schedule after all. Or it just might be wishful thinking on my part.

Anyway I don't believe there is as much non-compliance as they are portraying. Each time we went in with my son there was this huge sheet you had to sign and everything was already put there ahead of time. You could never *miss* anything. Think of a practice losing out on the profits from vaxing your kid. We religiously went in whenever we were called in, maybe that's what got all of us in trouble - making sure our kids never missed a single shot that was due.

As far as disease outbreaks go, did you notice that these are mostly from the dreaded MMR vaccine - live viruses at their very best. Maybe they do not like sitting together in the same vial, or even in the body when they are given together. Maybe it gets too crowded for them. Ever notice how people usually "catch" only one disease at a time (except for the immune compromised). Maybe viruses don't like to share the same host - "Gee, how dare you, this was suppposed to be MY picnic. What are YOU doing here as well?" Maybe the viruses get angry at the concept of sharing and get more virulent to get a larger share of the host. Immune system be d***ed we don't care. Has anyone ever done a study to study the behavior of viruses, their personalities, their inclinations? Might be something worth delving into.

[SAM]

Didn't the AAP (or was it the CDC) just say (when the Hannah Poling case came out) that the vaccine schedule was always flexible??? Am I just remembering this wrong - but I do remember thinking at the time I had never heard that before.

Now this article seems to say the exact opposite. I'm reminded of Harry Hoffner's piece a while back - if they want anyone to believe them, they really need to at least get their story straight. Right now, they're just doing a horrible job with the "cover up".

[Slipping on early]

From the article -

"Possibly as a result, the researchers found that many parents vaccinated their child too early to meet the recommended age requirements for a specific vaccine dose, thereby invalidating the vaccine's protection altogether."

I wonder how early is too early. Might it be 2 months, or might it be 4 months? Or 6? Does anyone know what the "recommended age requirements for a specific vaccine dose" might be? Does anyone know what a vaccine *does* to a child's body when it is supposedly "invalidated." This is the first I am even hearing of this particular concept. Did it by any chance slip out inadvertantly? I *think* this bears further investigation.

[L Land]

IF 25% of kids are not getting all of the vaccines. (What is all by the way?) Statistically, with a bell curve and SDs doesn't that mean that 50% of kids are getting all their vaccines and then 25% of kids are getting *more* than all of their vaccines?
How did they determine this? Considering all the drive by vaccine outlets who knows who got what vaccines. Doesn't this study show the flaws in the vaccine system run by the CDC and doctors then it proves parents are not getting their kids vaccinated???
These are the same people that can't count the number of kids with autism so how can they know how many get vaccinated?

[Terri Lewis]

The headline *needs* to be something more like this: "Parents Wise Up; More and More Refuse Unsafe Shots."

Then go into the idiocy (the "spin") presented by ABC Go.

Please hear me out:

Currently, someone new here (or anyone just following casually) may continue to be confused as to what's happening. I mean that.

I'm actually afraid the headline as is will cause people to feel that something bad is happening ("Parents Refuse Vaccination!!"), and to put further pressure on parents who choose not to vaccinate or who choose not to vaccinate "fully"--i.e., according to the extremely risky CDC "schedule."

Taken at face value, I think the current headline is very misleading. And I understand that it's meant as commentary on the article at ABC Go, but AOA is a *trusted* news source for lots of people, whereas mainstream news (print, TV, and other media) is fast becoming irrelevant for most people.

I mean this very, very sincerely.

Now it's still an arguable point as to whether mainstream news is irrelevant yet (and maybe I'm pushing for that, although I see signs that it's starting to happen).

I will say this: virtually no one that I know believes anything they read, see or hear reported in the mainstream news, whether local or national. There was a fairly lengthy article in The Cincinnati Enquirer (yesterday, I think) about autism, and RDI, and absolutely nothing about biomedical treatment. Yet again. It quoted the big shots in Cincy and a couple of parents, but--once again--the real cause and the real cures were simply missing (lip service again to "some parents think vaccines may contribute. . .").

For once, I felt no urge to try to correct what they'd done.

I just felt that I needed to come back to a *real* autism news source, and people who are really motivated to find the truth--well, God bless 'em--with a little luck and a computer, they can find it here, or at Generation Rescue, TACA, Autism Research Institute, etc., etc.

And those who still can't see past the lies. . .whew!. . .that's a tough nut to crack, isn't it? We talk about that a lot here. And I always have to remember (with a mix of shame, guilt, and just plain old feeling stupid) that there were little hints of something wrong when I was making vaccination decisions. . .and I decided to trust my doctor! I didn't have much to go on. I didn't know that I didn't know, as they say.

But I really believe that at least some parents (and parents-to-be) will be exposed to the truth in places like this, and lives will be spared.

So--can you change that headline?

Terri Lewis