As far as I'm aware, and please correct me if I'm wrong, the research that was published about a possible link between immunization and autism was published in 1998. There was then new research done on the topic in 2008 that there was no such link found.
The thimerosal in the vaccinations was removed in 2002 (or significantly reduced to trace amounts) in childhood vaccinations. With that said, the new study would be on different vaccinations than the first study would be on.
So did I miss something? Does that not still offer the chance that a child that was immunized before 2002 (or with a vaccine produced prior to 2002 but used after (as they never recalled them)) could still have gotten the onset of autism due to the vaccinations?

Come on, surely you're not naive enough to think that just because you didn't catch measles or mumps despite not being vaccinated, that that means your child will be safe? That sounds like a very dangerous attitude to me. There is no evidence that the MMR causes autism, yet there is plenty of evidence that unvaccinated children are at risk of death or serious damage from diseases like measles or mumps. I sincerley hope your gamble pays off, and you don't lose a child as a result.

it has nothing to do with whether or not i was vaccinated or whether or not i caught measles or mumps.
It has to do with what I believe and what I feel is best for my child[ren]. To most who aren't into the natural parenting way, it would seem so bizarre i suppose.
Vax'ing is not something I'm personally okay with doing to my child[ren] just like circumcision, that won't be happening either.
More & More parents are education themselves about vaccines & making their own decisions on what they think is best for their children instead of just nodding and smiling.
I know the pros and cons of both sides of the fence. I've debated it until i was blue in the face, but what it comes down to is personal belief and parenting styles.
No, I of course wouldn't want my child to die from any illness rather than be autistic, but that doesn't change my views on vax'ing either.

make that educating. . . apparently multitasking is not my strong point tonight. *sighs*

I'm not sure what your comment about being 'in the natural parenting way' is meant to imply. I intend on having children one day, and I will love them dearly. It is for that reason that I would never put them at risk of a deadly disease.

Circumcision to me is a much more hazy issue. At best it provides just some hygenic benefits. It is hardly the same as providing protection against a disease which KILLS.

I would strongly encourage parents to educate themselves. What concerns me is WHERE they are getting their information from. There is A LOT of incorrect information out there about vaccines, particularly in the media. There is no actual medical evidence to suggest they're dangerous. So it would appear to me that parents who don't vaccinate are basing their decision on poor sources of information.

Of course it's about personal belief, but personal belief has to be based on something. What is your decision based on? Where did you find your information that brought you to your decision to put your child at such risk?

the "natural parenting" statement is basically a reference for eco-friendly and attachment parenting, it kind of rolls them all into one. I didn't mean to offend you or anything.
I've gathered information from various places. Books, articles online, parenting forums, doulas, midwives & other medical professionals, speaking with other parents from both sides of the spectrum. I've gathered knowledge about how vaxing can be beneficial and how non-vaxing could cause problems in a child's future such as having to have them pulled from school if there is a chicken pox or measles outbreak. I've discussed, debated & discussed some more. It's taken a lot of discussion about both sides for my partner and i to come to our decision.
Sorry if this is scattered, i'm trying to write it while convincing a two year old that feeding chinchilla popcorn isn't the greatest idea he's ever had.

Dr. Sears, the pioneer of attachment parenting, does not suggest that all vaccines must be avoided.

What on earth is attachment parenting?
Scuse my ignorance here... maybe I should read more through my pregnancy!

http://www.attachmentparenting.org/principles/principles.php

A lot of it just seems like common sense!!

That's one of the reasons I love it so much. :) It seems very natural and family-centered. I'm excited to see what works for us!

How will you react to things that may not work though (not saying they won't, but you never know)? I know a lot of people set these expectations to live by things and do things certain ways... I have tried not to say "I will absolutely do this" because I'm trying to avoid setting myself up for disappointment!

And you're right, it does seem very natural, and definitely has a strong family focus. I find most of it to be very much in lines with what Ty and I desire for our family. Except for co-sleeping, not keen on that.

I guess all I can do is know my options beforehand, but not be too attached to any of them. As much as I'm passionate about breastfeeding, I may not be able to produce enough to do it exclusively. If that's the case, I won't beat myself up over it. I'm trying to keep an open mind to avoid the whole perfectionism letdown that I'm sure is inevitable when you get too attached (no pun intended) to an idea.

I think when it comes to AP you just have an open mind about things, you try things that work or don't work, but just because they don't it doesn't make you less attached. theres no doctrine for attachment parenting. theres a great board in the justmommies.com forum which has taught me alot.
I do think that everyone should be positive towards breastfeeding if its what you want, if you really want to do it, you will, whether it be alongside formula or exclusively. The first few weeks of feeding are not easy, but as long as you're intent on doing it you'll pull through it.

i love dr sears! and attachment parenting too! (just wanted to throw that in there lol)

I still think it's a dangerous decision to put your child at risk (did you read Blue Bella's post about her friend's child who caught measles?), but I am glad to hear you've tried to research it thoroughly. That's more than many parents do. Some just believe whateve the media tells them, even if it does put their child's life at risk.

And lol at your last sentence. :)

considering your source is a crucial component of critical thinking - but it works both ways. if all of the information you read about vaccines comes from studies funded by pharmaceutical companies (and most of them are, directly or indirectly), you're not getting unbiased information any more than if you take all of your information from 'autistic kids' parents against vaccination' groups. instead of reading just the researchers' conclusions, people have to read through the actual data in the studies and form their own.

regardless of which 'side' of the issue you're on, i think you can agree critical thinking skills are sorely lacking for most people. personally, i'm not sure where i stand on the issue of vaccinating children. i know i was fully vaccinated up until i was legally able to refuse them. i also got whooping cough at fourteen (and was vaccinated against it) and spread it to approximately 50 other people, many of whom were also vaccinated, one of many reasons i'm staunchly undecided. i am, however, completely against vaccinations for my cats. that's a whole other story, though. ;D

Well, I absolutely agree, and that is part of what concerns me. Many people who decide not to vaccinate do not have the skills to critically assess their sources. However, there are many many studies which dispute the MMR - autism link which were NOT carried out by the pharmaceutical companies. And that is the evidence I would base my decision on. Thankfully my degree has given me the skills to assess whether a study is good evidence or bad evidence. And based on what I have read, I consider the risk of harm from some possible link to autism to be minimal compared to the risk of death or disability from measles or mumps.

Based on your own statement though, surely you'll realise that your own experience of whooping cough, despite vaccination, is not 'good evidence' against vaccinating.

Why are you against vaccinating your cats? I've never heard of any adverse effects from vaccinating in cats. My cat is vaccinated against viral rhinotracheitis virus feline calicivirus and feline panleucopenia virus. He was initially also vaccinated against feline leukaemia virus, but at my vet's suggestion, I left that one out of his most recent booster, since he's an indoor cat, who doesn't come into contact with other cats, so he's highly unlikely to be bitten, which is the main mode of transmission.

i didn't say my whooping cough transmission experience was good evidence - it's just what got me started researching in the first place and one of the reasons i still haven't made up my mind on the subject. i wasn't commenting on the mmr-autism link, either. just studies in general. if you follow the money, you'll find most major medical studies are funded, one way or another, by pharmaceutical companies - if not directly, then by being somehow involved in other grant projects that could be thrown into jeopardy by unfavourable results (like other major studies at the same university or research facility, for example). maybe saying 'influenced one way or another' is more accurate than 'funded one way or another' - researchers know where their bread and butter comes from. it's rare to find any studies done that aren't tied in one way or another, now. sometimes it's a case of asking a question in a way that excludes the data that would prove the hypothesis wrong. in theory, experimental process, controls, and peer-review should mitigate that influence, but when they're all coming from a similar viewpoint it's hard to step outside that mindframe to look for hidden assumptions that could be skewing the data.

my cats - we can discuss that privately, if you'd like. animal vaccinations are a whole other topic, and as i've managed to avoid them quite well so far, i'd rather avoid posting trollbait publicly. ;D

I disagree with your statement that 'most medical studies are funded by pharmaceutical companies'. In the UK at least, that just is not true. Sure, many probably are, but many aren't. There are other ways of doctors accessing funds for research besides from drug companies. I also believe that sort of indirect blackmail you talk of (threats of losing grants etc) is not common in the UK. Pharmaceuticals is much bigger business in the US though (where drugs are paid for by patients or insurance companies, rather than the government), so I could believe that over there it could happen. I still think it's overly cynical to assume that that goes for the majority of studies though.

So of course you have to be selective of the evidence you base your decision on, however, taking all of that into account, there is still little good medical evidence that vaccines cause harm.

My first child is on the way and will be here in late May. I too am what you'd call a more "natural" parent in that I'm trying to achieve natural, drug-free labor and delivery. My sons will not be circumcised either and I'm not using formula unless I cannot exclusively breastfeed. I'm for organic foods and clothing and plan to use natural remedies for minor illnesses my children have. However, my parenting ideals allow for the use of certain vaccines because I feel they are necessary. Shunning all vaccinations does not benefit your child unless you have truly researched each and every one of them and have specific reasons why that particular vaccine is too high-risk for your child. Choosing not to vaccinate is not a lifestyle - it's a complicated decision. Unless you have religious convictions on the matter (i.e. you do not participate in medical intervention at ALL), then I'd be very interested to hear what kind of information you have that has led you to deny your child of every vaccination on the market.

We have not completely ruled out EVERY vaccination option. We've also discussed homeopath [and/or no live virus] vaxing, as well as tetanus, but it hasn't gone much further then "after their 3rd birthday, assuming there aren't any other health complications & we will look into it more."

there is no such thing as a "live" virus. i really hate when peopel refer to them as that way. by scientific definition, there is no such thing as a live virus beacuse they are not living things.

i know that wasn't the point of your post, just saying.

Straight from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/appendices/B/excipient-table-1.pdf

A list of ingredients in vaccines listed by ingredient.

Is the CDC a "poor source of information"?

Shannon, those ingredient lists can be found on many websites, so there's no question about what is in them. I think the real question to be answered is what are the repercussions of injecting said ingredients into our bodies and the bodies of very young children?