my kids won't ever get flu shots. my daughter just had the flu last week.. now its just a cold. I'd rather get the flu & deal with it.

Why? I'm just curious as to why your kids won't get flu shots?

First, I am fully aware that opinions are like rear ends, everyone has them. Some are hairy, some are waxed, some are clean and some just aren't. So...this is my "bare butt". My partner and I have had our children vaccinated in the past. We do not anymore. It struck me one day when the school was cramming the chicken pox vaccine down my throat that..... I got chicken pox. I felt my body and.... yep, I'm still alive. They are deadly. Our bodies are amazing pieces of machinery. They adapt and "reconfigure" to the diseases out there. Once a person catches a disease (the exception being HIV, or AIDS) then they should be pro-active with it, not reactive before they get it. We live what we would consider a fairly healthy lifestyle. My children are not home schooled, but they do attend a small private school. They are not exposed to a lot of children really. We live in what most would consider the country.

My reasons for NOT giving my children vaccines anymore..... well, a lot of it is due to wondering why it is so vitally important to our government that my children are injected with formaldehyde, arsenic (in it's unnatural form) and other toxins. Would I be more responsible were I to have them light up a cigarette? And while I understand the logic behind the thought that it might be dangerous to have a child who has not been vaccinated around a bunch of children who have....it really makes the idea of getting vaccinated mute...doesn't it? If the vaccination really works then they should be fine...aside from being slightly embalmed. What about children with low immune systems? Well, I know a few of those...and you know what, their parents take their children to "safe" clean homes, they don't take them to parks. Let me say it again they do not take them to public parks or public areas! In their minds it would be stupid and foolish.

The point that those of us who chose to not vaccinate are trying to make is, we don't scream at you for, what seems to us like, poisoning your children because we respect your right as a parent to make that choice FOR your children. We know that you make that choice because you feel you are doing EVERYTHING to protect your children from harm. That is what we are doing as well. If you can't respect that, then here's a pipe, stick something in it and smoke.

And, just a disclaimer, just because one has Phd behind their name doesn't mean I think they have good knowledge on the human body. I can be certain that dr.'s know where all the human parts are, but to assume that they know how they work would make donkey out of you and me. I have a cousin, whom I love dearly, who is a Dr. and believe me, we go round and round. She buys into the info the government and FDA want her to buy. That is good to a point, but why on earth won't the FDA approve herbs (which my cousin has an issue with as well since she would love to prescribe some sometimes), or alternative therapies? Because they are government controlled. You guessed it, I don't care for government control, therefor I highly suspect anything that is under their thumb.

Enough, I have sent my wrecking ball.

Roar.....are you scared. Go ahead, live in fear. You call me a monster and yet if you met me in the street I guarantee you would love me. You just hate what you see here on the screen. It is you guys who sound hateful. So be it. Live in your hate. I am indeed "uneducated", meaning I don't have a medical degree. My education lies elsewhere, so please, sit on your lonely horse, it seems awfully high and when you fall I'll take my homeopathic remedies and help fix it until the government gets there to screw it up. Please, call CPS on me. I meet all the requirements that this state sets out....it is my AMERICAN right in this FREE country. I thank GOD that it is still that way.

I don't think anyone here is calling you a monster. You're just misinformed. I believe your decisions are made in an attempt to protect your children, even if your reasons are misguided.

And I think most people have managed to avoid sounding hateful. Although the same can't really be said about you and your so please, sit on your lonely horse, it seems awfully high and when you fall I'll take my homeopathic remedies and help fix it until the government gets there to screw it up. :P

Why on earth must someone be lonely because they believe in vaccinating children?!

Incidentally, in the UK some complementary therapies are funded by our national health service (which is government funded). But they should be recognised as complementary, not alternative, therapies.

There is some evidence for the effectiveness of acupuncture and herbal treatments for certain conditions (although not for homeopathy). I actually think herbal medicines certainly should be recognised as medicines because like other drugs they can have serious side effects, and potentially life threatening interactions with conventional medicines (people often assume that because something is 'herbal' it is safe, but that isn't necessarily the case). At the moment, few people will disclose to a doctor that they're taking a herbal medicine, even if asked for a list of their medications. This is dangerous, because it could lead to them being given a drug which can interact with their herbal medicine (for example if certain pain killers are given to someone taking St Johns Wort it can cause fatal serotonin syndrome). If herbal medicines were given more recognition, this may help avoid this problem.

But the difficulty I think from the point of view of the FDA is that they can only approve drugs which have been subjected to proper clinical trials and proven to be safe AND effective. As far as I'm aware such trials do not exist. This is perhaps because the pharmaceutical industry does not see a profit in funding such trials, but it is not the fault of the government or the FDA.

With herbals and all-naturals too there are some consistency issues within the herbs themselves that can add to variation.

I know for my mother, during her severe intestinal yeast infection, she sent stool samples out to a candida wellness lab in order to have them cultivate the yeast. They found that, on the petri dishes, the chemical/pharmaceutical antifungals (micanizole and diflucan or whatever they were called) killed only 18-27% of the fungal strain that was covering her intestines and causing her to die of malnutrition. However, they took a fresh clove of garlic, cut it open and dripped the juices from it on the petri dishes, and roughly 75-80% sterilization took place. However, using old garlic or a solution made from dried garlic gave almost NO effect whatsoever. I've gotta find her lab paperwork, partly because I need to scan it and make digital copies for family medical records, but it's things like this that sort of give that hesitancy to herbs/hollistic/homeopathic treatments, I think. (Yes, I know garlic isn't really herbs, but I'm trying to make a point >.

I think someone with a medical license has a much better knowledge of the human body than you do to be honest. You've proven that with your posts here in this thread.

I'm sorry, but you're so misinformed.

I got chicken pox. I felt my body and.... yep, I'm still alive.

Yes, chicken pox is rarely fatal (especially in children). For that reason chicken pox vaccine isn't even on the UK schedule. I do not believe it is necessary. But the same certainly CANNOT be said for other diseases such as measles and meningitis. They can and DO kill. They can also cause serious disability. They are NOT diseases you want to catch, and a healthy lifestyle does not protect a child from them and it does not protect them from dying if they catch the disease.

I understand the logic behind the thought that it might be dangerous to have a child who has not been vaccinated around a bunch of children who have....it really makes the idea of getting vaccinated mute...doesn't it?

You're so missing the point. The risk of you sending your unvaccinated child to school isn't to the vaccinated children (they should be OK), you're putting at risk the children who CAN'T be vaccinated (e.g. the children with low immune systems or allergies to the vaccine. And yes, children with low immune systems may be attending school). For THOSE children to be protected from measles for example there needs to be a 70% herd immunity. What gives you the right to put those children at risk?

my children are injected with formaldehyde, arsenic (in it's unnatural form) and other toxins.

Thimerosal has now been removed from most vaccines.

Aluminium is there to make the vaccine produce a stronger immune response and thus make the vaccine work better. It has been used for 80 years and has an excellent safety record.

Mercury has been removed from most vaccines given to children under the age of 2.

As for formaldehyde, well, the human body makes more formaldehyde than is in any vaccine. The average quantity of formaldehyde to which a young infant could be exposed at one time may be as high as 0.2 mg (see table below). This quantity of formaldehyde is considered to be safe for two reasons. First, formaldehyde is essential in human metabolism and is required for the synthesis of DNA and amino acids (the building blocks of protein). Therefore, all humans have detectable quantities of natural formaldehyde in their circulation (about 2.5 ug of formaldehyde per ml of blood). Assuming an average weight of a 2-month-old of 5 kg and an average blood volume of 85 ml per kg, the total quantity of formaldehyde found in an infant’s circulation would be about 1.1 mg — a value at least five-fold greater than that to which an infant would be exposed in vaccines.

I wish I'd had the chicken pox vaccine since I got it at age 20 and it was NOT a pretty sight. My doctor said it was the worst case of chicken pox he'd even seen.

This is the thing with childhood illnesses... sure, most kids catch them and they're fine. But if you are unfortunate enough to catch a childhood illness as an adult then there are so many risks connected with it. People who choose to not vaccinate their children are forgetting what could happen when they reach adulthood.

I also think it's selfish as my ex couldn't have the MMR, due to an egg allergy. He is now at risk of contracting measles as an adult due to there not being herd immunity anymore.

I think the Chicken Pox vaccine is more so the children don't have to suffer through it. If I can save my daughter from having to go through that, I WILL. I remember getting Chicken Pox, and it was MISERABLE. Not to mention, my husband has never had Chicken Pox, so if Emmie got it, and brought it home it would be even WORSE for him!

That's probably true, but the fact is that no vaccine is completely risk free. The risks from vaccines are TINY, but to me personally, there has to be good justification for taking that risk (i.e. it is going to be protecting from a potentially life threatening, or seriously damaging, disease). I remember having chicken pox as a kid too, and it wasn't nice, but I don't remember it being unbearable either. It was no worse than the flu with an itch. I can see both sides of the argument with this one, but I personally don't think it's necessary (and I've had friends who've had it a adults, and it was no fun, but they didn't become seriously unwell. Even in adults, serious effects are rare).

Other vaccines like measles however are a TOTALLY different story.

Well, it was MISERABLE for me... I was young, and I had a REALLY bad case of chicken pox, and I cried and cried... I just don't want my daughter to have to suffer through that. I know it's not life threatening, but still the risks for that particular vaccine, for me, do not outweigh being able to prevent it.

I remember having the chicken pox when I was very little. I think I was just itchy, but I don't remember it being too bothersome. I got to stay home from school a few days which was pretty cool.

Fair enough. The risk is tiny, so I think it's up to the individual to decide if they want to take it or not.

Not only that, but the chicken pox vac is like the flu shot - as it doesn't mean you won't get it - just means if you do - it should be very mild. ;)
Both my girls had the vac and still got it :(

"Once a person catches a disease (the exception being HIV, or AIDS) then they should be pro-active with it, not reactive before they get it."

This doesn't really make sense to me. Be pro-active when you get it, not re-active before you get it? Shouldn't you be pro-active in preventing diseases? Taking a vaccine means you know when you're going to be ill, it reduces the risk of your immune system being compromised at a later date and putting you at a higher risk to catch OTHER diseases during that time.

I've researched vaccines, and I was educated as part of my science classes when I was younger at school. In England, the NHS provides care based on results - and vaccines produce excellent results.

You are right, the human body IS amazing - but it's not a "piece of machine". Swapping a tire on a car isn't like swapping a heart or a liver - there are limited supplies of body parts and you'd be lucky to find a replacement. The body itself is irreplaceable, and sometimes it needs help.

It is your right to choose whether or not your vaccine your children, and the majority of people here agree. But you should be aware that it is statistically proven that your child is at a higher risk of diseases - diseases that COULD kill your child. If your child catches the measles, and catches a cold at the same time, he or she is going to have a hell of a fight on their hand. The immune system can only handle so much at any given time, no matter how much of an amazing machine it is.

I stopped getting the flu vaccine a while ago, mostly because I still caught the flu (even after getting the flu shot), just a different strain than the one I had been vaccinated with.
Vitamin C works fine for me, as I don't eat a lot of fruits or veggies.

I think it's really up to the person or parent if they want to get their kids or themselves vaccinated against the flu.

I have to apologize for the last entry, it was actually meant for another part of this site, not this thread in particular, even though it pertains to the current subject. When I said one should be pro-active, I meant by living a healthy lifestyle and not by just accepting what modern medicine says is good for us.

The formaldehyde made in our bodies is naturally occurring, not out of a beaker, not to mention that our bodies perhaps the right amount, not to much. My child would be at higher risk for disease...were they to eat what is considered a normal fatty American meal, play video games and watch tv rather then eating whole foods and getting out to just play in the fresh air. Sorry, we are back to nature granola's and thus far my kids have been all but licked by kids who have h1n1 for weeks now and they have not even remotely ill from it. I'm not saying that they aren't going to get it, but... the odds are fairly good. As for the other diseases, my kids aren't all that likely to get it because everybody else is vaccinated...right? And if they were to get a disease, there are proven alternative methods (not something I "read about" but have actually witnessed with the measles) that work. Let me be clear... I AM NOT A FAITH HEALER TYPE PERSON! I'll say it again I AM NOT A FAITH HEALER TYPE PERSON! Hospitals are there for a very good reasons. Dr.'s are there for a very good reason and I trust them on most things....just not vaccines. The stats that most are quoting are stats given by the FDA....as I said earlier, one would have to believe that the FDA really
had our best interests in mind...I don't, so it is not my impression that those are accurate statistics. People in other countries who don't do vaccines have a longer life span then America, some even into the 100's, but they eat a VERY healthy diet. America as a whole, doesn't.

I did not always believe this way. Before I had my own children I totally bought into modern medicine's ideals. When I had children though I felt it was important to know what and why I was putting things into my children. We do SOME vaccines, but very little. Tetanus is important to me and the lesser of the two evils IMO.

As for me being misinformed, I might say the same of the reverse thought. But, I digress, again, I apologize for the previous post, I placed it in the wrong spot.

vaccinating children should be a whole 'nother thread, really, from choosing to vaccinate yourself. i'm happy to say that i have never gotten the flu shot, only because i think it is unnecessary for me. on the flipside, my husband has gotten his (and will also be getting the swine flu vaccine), so i figure my chances of getting it are at least slightly lower, lol.

The formaldehyde made in our bodies is naturally occurring, not out of a beaker, not to mention that our bodies perhaps the right amount, not to much.

It makes no difference if it is produced by the body or produced in a beaker. It is still the same chemical compound. And as I have already stated, the body produces many times as much formaldehyde than the TINY amount that is in vaccines (so by your logic, if the amount produced by the body is a 'safe' amount, the amount in vaccines surely must be safe as it's far far less). There is no evidence whatsoever that this is in any way harmful.

My child would be at higher risk for disease...were they to eat what is considered a normal fatty American meal, play video games and watch tv rather then eating whole foods and getting out to just play in the fresh air.

Doing those things puts your child at a higher risk of diabetes, heart disease and infections. But avoiding those things is NOT enough to protect them from catching any infections. It won't prevent them catching measles or meningitis, and it certainly won't prevent them dying from them.

As for the other diseases, my kids aren't all that likely to get it because everybody else is vaccinated...right?

What a stupid, ignorant comment. Did you read what I said before? For non-vaccinated kids to be protected, there needs to be (for measles, for example) a 70% herd immunity... therefore 70% of children must be vaccinated. Some children can't be vaccinated (e.g. due to low immune systems or allergies), and the more people like you choose not to vaccinate... the herd immunity will soon drop below 70%. YOU are contributing to that... and when it happens (as it did in the UK following the MMR scare), NO, your child will NOT be protected. And nor will those children who CAN'T have the vaccine.

What are these 'proven' treatments for measles that you've seen work? Was the child in question sick with pneumonia and in intensive care? The severity of measles can vary. Perhaps the child you 'witnessed' this treatment in was just lucky. :P

The stats that most are quoting are stats given by the FDA....as I said earlier, one would have to believe that the FDA really had our best interests in mind...I don't, so it is not my impression that those are accurate statistics.

European statistics are not produced by the FDA, but they say the exact same thing.


in other countries who don't do vaccines have a longer life span then America, some even into the 100's, but they eat a VERY healthy diet.

What nonsense. Here is a list of the countries with highest life expectancy:

1. China (84.4 years) - National vaccination programme
2. Andorra (82.5 years) - National vaccination programme
3. Japan (82.1 years) - National vaccination programme
4. Singapore (82.0 years) - National vaccination programme
5. San Marino (82.0 years) - 92% of 1 year olds vaccinated against DPT, polio, measles, hep B and HiB (couldn't find info on national programme)
6. Hong Kong (81.9 years) - National vaccination programme
7. Australia (81.6 years) - National vaccination programme
8. Canada (81.2 years) - National vaccination programme
9. France (81.0 years) - National vaccination programme
10. Sweden (80.9 years) - National vaccination programme (some mandatory for school attendance)
11 Switzerland (80.9 years) - National vaccination programme
12 Guernsey (80.8 years) - National vaccination programme
13 Israel (80.7 years) - National vaccination programme
14 Iceland (80.7 years) - National vaccination programme
15 Anguilla (80.7 years) - National vaccination programme

NONE of those have an average life expenctancy into their hundreds. I can't be bothered typing the entire list out, but UK is no.25 (79.0 years) and USA is no.35 (78.1 years).

The 10 countries at the bottom of the list are Rwanda (46.2 years), Liberia (45.7 years), Central African Republic (44.7 years), Afghanistan (43.8 years), Zimbabwe (43.5 years), Lesotho (42.6 years), Sierra Leone (42.6 years), Zambia (42.4 years), Mozambique (42.1 years), Swaziland (39.6 years). Many of these countries have low rates of vaccination.

And if you look at child mortality rates (as life expectancy involves far more variables over long periods of time such as diet, exercise, smoking etc, which are not relevant to this debate) the result is the same. You can see a list HERE, but note that the countries with the highest mortality rate are mostly countries where millions of children are unvaccinated. The countries with the lowest infant mortality rates (Iceland, Singapore, Japan, Sweden, Norway, Hong Kong, Finland, Czech Republic, Switzerland, South Korea) are ALL countries in which there ARE vaccination programmes.

These are the FACTS. Some of the things you said above are simply untrue. Therefore, you clearly are misinformed. It's not about opinion, it's about the facts.

What you seem to fail to understand is that we know what those statistics say. We also know who pays for those statistics to be done. We distrust the organizations and the funding they get. As far as we are concerned, those statistics are made up by people in the pockets of the big pharma companies. This is a completely pointless discussion because while YOU may have faith in it all, WE do not, and nothing either side says is going to change the other side's mind. And as long as people can remain respectful of the other side's opinion, we can go on and be fine. It's when people like Sypha Belnades get all nasty calling us monsters and barbaric and unfit to be parents and suggesting getting our information and taking our children away from us because we made decisions she disagrees with based on information she disagrees with. You may not agree with our distrust in the organizations behind and backing your statistics, but that doesn't mean anything to us because you aren't going to prove to us that we're wrong in our distrust. And while you (and most of the others in this thread) have at least had the decency not to demand our children be taken from us, others have done EXACTLY , sthat and called us selfish for making this decision (which really makes no sense whatsoever since my decision to not vaccinate my children is based on what I believe to best for THEM, and being selfish means doing what is best for YOU).

This is all I'm going to say about it and I will no longer be visiting this thread. It's a ridiculous discussion that has absolutely no potential. You're not going to see my side because you have too much faith (in my opinion) in those organizations/companies, I'm going to disagree with your side because of the things (many not even vaccine related) I have researched into that have CAUSED me to not trust those organizations/companies. Even IF there was potential to change someone's mind, it's certainly not at a blog website in a thread.

Are you suggesting that the FDA or the pharmaceutical companies make up the official statistics on international life expectancy and infant mortality rates?? No they don't! What a ridiculous suggestion! The figures I posted for mortality rates came from Wikipedia, and their reference was the CIA world fact book. They had nothing whatsoever to do with any sort of pro-vaccination campaign. I found the information on the vaccination programmes in those countries myself. Those figures are facts, they are not created by the FDA (or the pharmaceutical companies) as part of this big pro-vaccine conspiracy theory you believe in.

I'm not being disrespectful Another diarist posted information that is simply UNTRUE (suggesting that some countries, where people are not vaccinated, have higher life expectancies and even average life expectancies over 100). It always concerns me to see people post things which are untrue but which could manipulate others into putting their children at risk from life threatening diseases.

I have not once responded in an aggressive way like Sypha Belnades, (and I've certainly never suggested anyone here is barbaric or unfit parents) so I'd appreciate you not comparing me to her. And if you're annoyed with her, please respond to her regarding it, not me. Thanks.

I do not have faith in these organisations/companies. I have nothing to do with pharmaceutical companies or the FDA. I trust the FACTS and the medical evidence. I don't give in to scare tactics, misleading ingredient lists, or false claims by campaign groups, as others here seem to. I have produced fact after fact here, but some people will just choose to ignore them and believe the scare campaigns instead.

Darling, she is the type of person who is under the impression that the government is trying to control the population and that there's some whole "New World Order" thing behind the healthcare system, therefore they distrust governments and medical firms that publish health information.

My mother buys into it, and I wanna slap her for it sometimes. Granted, there are some valid points, and skepticism is healthy and does prompt individual research, but you're not going to change Lavender's opinion. I can already tell what kind of thinking she does when it comes to healthcare.