The Daily Kos ran a piece about Dr. Wakefield. Grab a Tums and click HERE. One of the comments struck David Kirby as particularly insightful. He sent it to us and we're sharing it with you.
why are you the arbiter of what is right? (1+ / 0-)
I'm not some back-woods anti-science lunatic. I have post-graduate training in immunology, virology, and microbiology. I work with vaccines every day at my veterinary hospital, and am responsible for making the vaccine protocols. I'm trying to make the point that there are very rational science-based people, like myself, who see problems with the current infant vaccine recommendations. We're not anti-vaccine, just believe that there's not enough willingness to acknowledge side effects, and thereby work to make them safer. Did you read my previous post???????
For instance, there is more than one study (with real scientists and everything) showing that in animals (more than one species studied) the post-vaccinal side effects demonstrably increase with increasing number of vaccines given at one time.
It is very hard for me to believe that the human immune system is so different from several other mammal species in this regard, since it's similar otherwise. Yet I've seen several M.D.'s claim that the more vaccines that are given at one time, the better the immune system is stimulated to produce antibodies, and not to worry that more vaccines keep being added to the schedule to be administered together.
Any veterinary internal medicine text will list all the possible side effects of vaccines, some of which we see daily. These are most commonly mild fever reactions, but all too often we see more serious reactions, some of which cause death, or cause diseases that result in euthanasia. It may still not be reason enough not to vaccinate, but it is a really good reason to vaccinate as safely as possible.
BTW, all four of the veterinarians at my practice, who are different ages and went to 4 different vet schools in different parts of the country, all practice delayed and/or selective vaccinations with their children. We know enough about how the vaccines work, as well as how pharmaceutical companies work, to take it all with a big grain of salt and make our own judgments.
The current recommendations also don't take into account people who practice extended breastfeeding, like myself. It's been shown that breastmilk continues to contain protective antibodies for most of the diseases that the mother has immunity for. (So I'm not endangering your child)
Because I understand the complexities of the science very well, I do think I'm qualified to critique it, and to make a plan for my daughter that is safe for her. When you say: "We have the responsibility as parents not just to do what we think is right, but to actually do what is right.", I would just answer by saying that I am actually doing what is right, and you're just doing what you think is right. It seems like most of the people posting here are just as knee-jerk in their responses, and ignorant of medicine, as the vaccine-autism folks on the other side that they're so quick to malign.
I'm in my 40's and am current on most of my vaccines. I'm wondering if all the hysterical people posting here who are happy to vaccinate my small child willy-nilly have kept their MMR, whooping cough, etc vaccines up to date. They don't provide life-long immunity, you know!
Do you know how barbaric the original polio vaccines were? The side effects then were so obvious that the issues were fairly rapidly addressed. Now I think the problems are more insiduous, but need to be addressed nonetheless. To denigrate any criticsm as irrational, or worse, is the kind of attitude that prevents good scientific research.
by georgeisamonkey on Mon Feb 09, 2009 at 10:27:04 PM PST