Question:

If immunization is so safe, and all of the other children are immunized, my kids are of no threat to them?

by  |  earlier

0 LIKES UnLike

If immunization is so safe, and all of the other children are immunized, then the immunized children are safe from the threat of my non immunized children right?

 Tags:

   Report

10 ANSWERS


  1. Repent i have always gotten my children immunized, they are grown now so..all i can say is don't fear and pray over your children, because children will experience health issues regardless..i don't know if i could tell you to NOT get your children immunized.  That is your choice!


  2. RIGHT. But people don't THINK that way.. they just try spouting to you the same brainwashing they have been taught.

  3. What makes you think "all the other children are immunized"??

    How can you be sure?  Do you KNOW "all the other children" that your fragile, non-immune children are in contact with?  How about the kids that THOSE kids have contacted?

  4. not only are they safe from your  or any children (as a result from being immunised or vaccinated) but , on the contrary, it is your children who are  at risk from the others  unless you pay much attention to their health and immune system:

    1) contact with nature from an early age, 2) let them catch mild   illnesses (the usual benign ones) from other kid s 3) dont eat sugar junk foods, presrves etc.. that bring down immunity: only fresh balanced  natural  unprocessed foods

  5. Whoa, whoa, whoa, does ANYONE on this board know what the h**l they're talking about?  First of all, immunizations are NOT safe for all children, and never have been.  This is a concept the drug companies know well about and they actually have negative vaccine reporting telephone sites and websites in place and have had so for at least the last 20 years.  They have also budgeted monies to compensate families of children who have had adverse reactions (including but not limited to mental retardation and loss or reversal of age appropriate neurological functioning, loss of hearing, loss of vision, permanent neurological impairment and yes, even death.)  It's called a calculated risk, and like ANY invasive medical procedure, there is MOST definitely a risk.  There always has been, and any drug manufacturer will tell you that.  These adverse reactions are taken into account and planned for when a new vaccine  or drug is being researched and created.  Any researcher knows this and works accordingly.  The US government knows this as well, but because they believe and they state that vaccination is in the best interests of the majority of the population (which, sorry kids, even tho' I'm a huge proponent of Alt. Med, I actually agree with for the most part, especially having a child that nearly died from meningococcemia at 12 1/2 months who lost her left foot, four of her left fingertips, and much of her neurological functioning, and also knowing 2 people who contracted polio in the 50's), the government and most doctors knowingly and willingly have to sacrifice (they feel) the health of a few for the health of many.  If you were a public health specialist, you would believe and do the exact same things, and so would I.  The problems come, however, when it's your kid that has the negative reaction(s).  I actually wanted the 900% increase in the diagnosis of autism in the last decade (and that's a FACT, Jack) to be able to be explained by something as simple as a bad thimerosol reaction, especially since my nephew is on the Autism Spectrum.  The statistics and the FACTS just do not support this.  I wish they did.  It would have been an easy fix.  (And on that note, which moron put mercury or a mercury derivative into something that was going to go into a human body and brain, the bodies and brains of BABIES and CHILDREN in the first place???.  The effects of mercury have been well known for at least a couple of centuries.  Where the h**l do you think the expression "Mad as a hatter..." came from???  People knew about mercury toxicity in the felting and hat making (Millinery) industries since at least the early 1700's.)  

    Another couple of facts (and all you parents out there should have done enough research to have these facts MEMORIZED, so that you can say you've done your homework about something so incredibly important as getting your child vaccinated or not.  It's called taking responsibility for one's own and one's children's health.)  1)  In the 1990's, there were several outbreaks of whooping cough in Rhode Island.  OVER 90% of the children who contracted the disease (Pertussis) were FULLY IMMUNIZED, so NO, vaccines are not, and never have been 100% effective in any population at any time, so know this.  Bacteria and viruses mutate constantly and just because an immunization starts out being effective against a bacteria or a virus, does NOT (and will probably NEVER) mean that it will stay that way.  This is why people have to get booster shots every 10 years or so with many diseases, such as tetanus for example.  The effectiveness of some of the shots wears off over time, and we lose our immunity to some diseases over time.  2)  The simple fact of the matter is that all the other children are NOT immunized, and you will never know who is, and who isn't.  What's also true is that immunization, as I've said, does NOT confer 100% immunity for all time for all children, so children that have never been immunized CAN be a threat to children that either have not finished receiving all their jabs yet or to children for whom the jabs have either not worked or have worked less than optimally.  And yes folks, the levels of antibodies our bodies make to a vaccine (and thus immunity) differs from batch to batch of vaccine, and differs from human to human.  It seems from your words that you're arguing that everyone else's child/parent should be doing your work for you and should be taking all the calculated risks.  Sorry.  I reject that notion out of hand, both as lousy parenting, and stupid, lousy gambling and lack of intelligent, scientific thought, neither of which quality I would hope to see in a parent.  So no, your kids are definitely NOT safe if unimmunized, and even kids that are immunized may not be fully safe either.  It's a case of parents, doctors and vaccine researchers/manufacturers doing the best they can, most of the time.

    So here's my position as a parent:  1)  I have no trust in the government or its ability to tell the truth or to be transparent, whatsoever, and I keep that in mind at all times.  2)  As a parent, my job is to take all the information I can, and to make the best possible decisions for my child at all times, praying for guidance, and stuffing my brain with as much of the latest research as I can, at all times, and I'm pretty much reading every single day of my life, so wrap your heads around that fact.  As a highly educated and fully informed parent, I believe, and I have found, that almost all immunizations are what I want to give my child, lacking as we are any better alternative, especially for such diseases as diphtheria, tetanus, meningococcemia (Bacterial meningitis), hepatitis, and polio.  In many families in the 1800's (and before, and even well into the early 1900's), parents could expect to lose one out of every two children they gave birth to before the age of 5.  I NEVER want to go back to that place again, do you?  Most people here have never seen a case of diphtheria or scarlet fever in all their lives.  Used to be commonplace.  Don't want to go back to that place ever again, either.  For diseases that can be easily lived through with minimal complications, I believe parents should be able to make a personal choice, like mumps in girls or chicken pox.  For really, really serious diseases, like polio, hepatitis, diphtheria, whooping cough in infants and small children and most especially meningitis related diseases, immunization should and MUST BE required, I feel.  And while we're on the subject, there has been an immunization for meningococcemia since the 1940's.  It was given primarily to the military and government workers going abroad.  It conferred around a 60-80% immunity to bacterial meningitis, but was not placed on the list of compulsory jabs, for many, many reasons, one of which is that the bacteria that causes most cases of bacterial meningitis mutates about every 10 years, second of which is that the immunization is expensive, and third of which is that while Bacterial Meningitis is the third largest killer worldwide of children after starvation and  dysentery (and warfare that the US commits upon 3rd world populations while bombing their countries of origin back into the Stone Age so US Multinational Corporations can go in and loot all their national resources (and then charge US taxpayers outrageous amounts of money to "rebuild" the country...but I digress...)), the disease was considered to be "low-incidence" in the US and not deserving of immediate attention or "Urgent" status.  A disease in which 80% of those who contract it (according to my daughter's doctors) experience either death or SERIOUS, life-threatening, life-changing adverse sequelae, such as loss of vision, loss of hearing, profound retardation, vegetative states and coma, loss of single or mulitiple limbs (I know one child who lost all of her arms and legs and part of her face in early March, 1997, the same year my child almost died from the disease, and 2 adults, one a college student, who died in Northern CA from the disease in 1997.  Like I said, it's all just numbers and statistics and "calculated risks", until it's your kid.  My baby daughter had already been vaccinated for HiB.  I didn't even know there were 5 bacterias and 2 other viruses that could cause meningitis until my baby girl contracted one of them (Neisseria meningitides).  I didn't know that there were epidemics of Tubercular meningitis in Ireland and the UK in the '20's that killed multiple children and babies.  I thought I had done my job by getting my child immunized for HiB as far as any sort of meningitis was concerned.  I would have far preferred my baby to have had a 60% or an 80% chance of not contracting the disease at all (and have had the immunization), than to have had no protection whatsoever.  As far as I am concerned, as are the parents worldwide who have lost a child or children to meningitis are concerned, the American Academy of Pediatrics was (in my opinion) disgusting late and wholesale medically irresponsible and negligent in not having the immunization for Bacterial Meningitis be the next on the list to be required.  s***w chicken pox.  Everyone I know has had chicken pox.  None of them died or were seriously ill.  I wish my child had had half a chance NOT to get meningococcemia.  I want her foot back.  I'd like her precious fingertips back.  I want her IQ back to where it was before she was ill, not at the 62-71 she tests at now post-meningitis.  She was talking in two word (or more) sentences at 10 months for chrissake.  She was amazing and brilliant and on fire to talk, to walk and to learn.  Now she is permanently disabled, and permanently damaged.  And you would risk that or worse?  Do me a favor.  Don't be

  6. NO! first of all immunization is very important and can be lifesaving so I have no idea why your children aren't immunized. secondly, in most cases, immunization only reduces the risk of a disease, or reduces it's severity. just because someone is immunized doesn't mean that they can't get infected.

    getting infected from a vaccine.. this is very rare and usually occur when the patient is immunocompromized.. there are hundreds of drugs that can cause severe side-effects, doesn't mean they're not effective

    mercury.. non of the studies have been conclusive and they actually caused more harm than good. a lot of people in Europe stopped vaccinating their children against polio because ONE guy said the mercury used to preserve it caused autism. as a result, many children became infected with polio.

  7. not always there are alot of illegals that are not vaccinated they can get unvaccinated children sick and child who have yet to get that particular shot sick if they are exposed to some disease b4 the scheduled shot how will they be protected

  8. you got it, but as always, people do not analyze what they fear.

  9. No.  The immunizations dont always prtect 100%,  but instead try to reduce how bad the virus would be if the person were infected.

    The mmr is NOT proven to cause autism.  It is a coincidental link as autism begins to become noticable and diagnosable at that age.

    Beyond that, with the growing number of parents who are not vaccinating, and the huge number of illegals that werent vaccinated, your child is actually at a huge risk.  If you pay attention to the news, there have been a few measles out breaks over the last several years directly tied to parents not immunizing their children.

    So what are you going to do when your child comes into contact with someone who does have the measles or some other things that you have not vaccinated for?  Your child gets the disease and dies.

    Well, thats your choice, but...   not worth the risk to me.

    I will be retaking the series of immunizations beginning this summer as my stem cell transplant (bone marrow transplant) wiped all that out of my system.  I will be taking the mmr, dt/ipv, hep b, and varicella vaccines.

  10. Yes, but people fear what they don't understand.

    I know one person that actually got one of the diseases from one of the childhood "vaccinations" and I know of a couple others. Also, there have been too many children who have developed mental illnesses from the Mercury content between all the shots.

    Dr. Whitaker (among other natural doctors) has done quite a bit of research on this subject and has shown quite a few of the trends along these lines. It's best to do the research before going with the "status quo".

Question Stats

Latest activity: earlier.
This question has 10 answers.

BECOME A GUIDE

Share your knowledge and help people by answering questions.
Unanswered Questions