Re: MMR Advice from those who think it's dodgy please
- From: marc.simmins@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 01:03:27 -0700 (PDT)
On Sep 24, 10:50 pm, "Retired" <reti...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Peter Parry" <pe...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:022ld4ddftcnpntv4rlo8hp0e085ius1aj@xxxxxxxxxx
On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 18:50:06 +0200 (CEST), Nomen Nescio
<nob...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
With regards to Rubella, you can read about the experiences of parents
who have opted out of giving their children the MMR vaccine, you might
find some relevant information here:
http://www.jabs.org.uk/
You might find hysteria, you won't find information.
6) These are results from two studies conducted to compare the health
of vaccinated and unvaccinated children.
Study 1: Conducted in Netherlands in 2004
by the Nederlandse Vereniging Kritisch Prikken) [Dutch Association for
Conscientious Vaccination] an anti-vaccination campaigning
organisation. The "study" was a postal questionnaire sent to members
of the association and others.
Study 2: This was a study of 9,000 boys in California and Oregon.
A telephone survey carried out under the control of and on behalf of
"Generation Rescue" an American rabidly anti vaccination group.
What I believe worries a lot of people is not the vaccination, but the
multiple vaccination in one go and the concerns that they could interfere
with each other.
It is well known that certain foods interfere with the action of drugs; for
example grapefruit juice enhances the effect of certain anti-histamines and
can cause the equivalent of an overdose; Alcohol with certain anti-biotics
is definitely a No No.
As far as I know no real research has been done on this aspect with the
vaccines.
When our children were young, it was 2 - measles & mumps
Then it became 3 - MM & Rubella
Soon it is to become 4
Strange, each change apparently coincided with the expiry of the patent for
the previous one!- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I agree. We refused the MMR to our daughter due to this very issue. At
the age MMR is given, the immune system is still developing and isn't
quite at the stage to fight off threatening viruses. How can anyone
say that a triple vaccine, given to a child without a proper defence
system, can be 100% safe? We can't even guarrantee that a single
vaccine is safe at that age, although a single jab will be safer than
a triple one.
We have for years innoculated our children with single jabs without
any side affects (or virus outbreaks) and these were only phased out
due to one reason, cost. I've said on many occasions, the MMR was
introduced and the single jab removed purley for cost reasons, nothing
more. If it was to do with any other reason, they would have still
allowed the single jab. This is why the Governmenty refused to even
discuss the issue when the whole MMR thing was in the news.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- RE:MMR Advice from those who think it's dodgy please
- From: Nomen Nescio
- Re: MMR Advice from those who think it's dodgy please
- From: Peter Parry
- Re: MMR Advice from those who think it's dodgy please
- From: Retired
- RE:MMR Advice from those who think it's dodgy please
- Prev by Date: Re: Liability for Fraud
- Next by Date: Re: Commercial Lease
- Previous by thread: Re: MMR Advice from those who think it's dodgy please
- Next by thread: Re: MMR Advice from those who think it's dodgy please
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading