Measles sweeps through Brighton and Hove (From The Argus)
Get involved: Send your news, views, pictures and video by texting SUPIC to 80360 or email us.
Measles sweeps through Brighton and Hove
11:20am Wednesday 16th November 2011 in News Exclusive By Emily Walker, Chief Reporter
Natasha Peirce with six-month-old Elizabeth who is recovering from measles and Emily Mason with 10-month-old Bea, who has just had an emergency MMR jab Buy this photo »
Health bosses are battling a measles outbreak.
Nine children at two Hove schools have been diagnosed with the potentially fatal infectious disease in the past couple of weeks – more than the entire number of cases in the whole of Sussex last year.
City health bosses are working with the Health Protection Agency to try to prevent the spread of the disease, which can cause serious side effects such as brain damage and fits.
Vaccinations have been organised for pupils at Davigdor Infant and Somerhill Junior schools next week where there have been a cluster of cases.
In some cases babies too young to be vaccinated have contracted the illness from contact with infected older children who have not been given the jabs.
Brighton and Hove has had 29 cases confirmed since the start of the year and another 13 patients are suspected to have measles.
Last year there were just two confirmed cases of measles in the city and eight in total across the county.
Health bosses are urging parents to make sure their children have been inoculated.
The mother of one baby who caught the illness said parents who chose not to take up the MMR jab were “playing Russian roulette” with children’s lives.
For a special report on the extent of measles in Brighton and Hove see pages 20 and 21 of today's Argus.
Do you think parents should take up the MMR jab?
Tell us what you think?
Leave your comments below or vote in our online poll.
Comments(180)
Henryadamo
says...
1:42pm Wed 16 Nov 11
Rita Snatch
says...
2:13pm Wed 16 Nov 11
They should be encouraged to have single inoculations if they are worried/concerned about the possible (publicised) side-effects of that Triple Vaccination.
I can't see what the problem is with giving single inoculations when a parent is very concerned about the use of Triple Inoculations.
whereisthe...?
says...
3:08pm Wed 16 Nov 11
About time they were told THEY have a wider social responsibility, and there's worse places to start than with telling them that their ridiculous unfounded fears they got from reading The Sun are causing other, innocent children and people to get infected.
Parents, not just children, need to learn to grow up too!
monkeymoo
says...
3:20pm Wed 16 Nov 11
AngelicDevil wrote:Parents used to have the choice of:
It is completely irresponsible to not vaccinate your child. Not only are you risking their life but others around you too! When it comes to things like this parents need to listen to the advice of the relevant health body. We are now seeing an alarming rise in diseases that were almost stamped out entirely. But then again a part of me thinks, if you're stupid enough to not vaccinate your children then perhaps you deserve the potentially fatal consequences of your actions.
1. Give their children the MMR jabs.
2. Give their children the separate injections, but they must pay for them.
3. Give their children no injections at all.
The Labour government removed choice "2" for all parents (unless you travel abroad and do it). Leaving only choices "1" and "3".
It is not irresponsible for a parent to choose not to give an injection to their child IF THEY BELIEVE THE INJECTION COULD CAUSE HARM to their child. Only a narrow minded person would think otherwise.
Does anyone remember things like Chicken pox, or Measles Parties? When 1 kid in the area caught one of these "diseases", the other mums would soon have all the kids round for a party. That way, the child would be exposed to it, and build up a natural immunity to it at an early age. Always worked out ok!
AngelicDevil
says...
3:47pm Wed 16 Nov 11
Parents DO NOT always know best, unfortunately you do not have to be a genius in order to breed.
And no, I do not remember chicken pox/measles parties.
The problem is not necessarily about your "healthy" child catching it but an immune deficient person\child or a pregnant woman being unwittingly exposed to one of these diseases. That is where the biggest danger lies.
As I said before, if people want to be daft and believe what so and so's says about something then go for it. But don't blame anyone when your child dies because there's been plenty of information given out to prevent these diseases becoming epidemics like they once were.
jools99
says...
3:50pm Wed 16 Nov 11
Several years ago I was "forced" by the Health Protection Agency to have two courses of Tetanus injections following an injury in the garden (they told me I needed 2 courses as I had had cancer). The tetanus jab is now combined with an anti-polio injection but I was assured there would be no side-effects from having 2 courses. I developed a mild dose of polio as a result of the combined jabs, so I can understand why people fear combined inoculations. Sadly, choice is being eliminated in many areas of NHS healthcare in the name of cost-cutting.
AngelicDevil
says...
3:55pm Wed 16 Nov 11
sandalman
says...
4:04pm Wed 16 Nov 11
monkeymoo
says...
4:05pm Wed 16 Nov 11
AngelicDevil wrote:You only speak from your point of view I'm afraid.
Perhaps a little read up on child mortality in the Victorian era and prior to that would highlight why vaccination is so important.....
Before you "question" me, I carried out plenty of research into the MMR jab. I would have given my children the separate ones, but that choice was taken away from me. I chose to give them the combined MMR in the end.
What i am saying, is that your own personal views CANNOT be pushed onto other parents. If they believe that something may harm their child, they have the right to refuse it...for example.....
1. The recent swine flu injection offered to pregnant mothers. Later found out to be "none" tested!!
2. Thalidomide, a German-invented drug which was used in the 1950's and 1960's across Europe to tame the side effects of pregnancy. It caused birth defects in newborns who's mother had used the drug.
Both of the above were assured consistently "safe" to parents. Maybe you SHOULD remember that!
Hove Actually
says...
4:33pm Wed 16 Nov 11
It is wrong that a girl of 13 or 14 can get the pill without a parents knowledge or consent and that fluoride is dumped in thier drinking water, (a chemical that is a known poison that no one knows what the effects will be over 50 years, like Asbestos) now you want to force this on them when three single jabs PAID for by the parent was considered criminal by the last government and therefore banned, Tell people they must do one thing and they will want to do something else because who believes a Right Honourable liar
AngelicDevil
says...
4:38pm Wed 16 Nov 11
monkeymoo wrote:All I'm saying is in the case of the MMR there are no proven links to autism etc. In fact, the research that was done was recently proven invalid - the amount of damage that one man has done to the confidence of parents is outrageous. And now more and more "know it all" parents think they should question age old, safe procedures.
AngelicDevil wrote: Perhaps a little read up on child mortality in the Victorian era and prior to that would highlight why vaccination is so important.....You only speak from your point of view I'm afraid. Before you "question" me, I carried out plenty of research into the MMR jab. I would have given my children the separate ones, but that choice was taken away from me. I chose to give them the combined MMR in the end. What i am saying, is that your own personal views CANNOT be pushed onto other parents. If they believe that something may harm their child, they have the right to refuse it...for example..... 1. The recent swine flu injection offered to pregnant mothers. Later found out to be "none" tested!! 2. Thalidomide, a German-invented drug which was used in the 1950's and 1960's across Europe to tame the side effects of pregnancy. It caused birth defects in newborns who's mother had used the drug. Both of the above were assured consistently "safe" to parents. Maybe you SHOULD remember that!
And by the way, Thalidomide was not tested as thoroughly as it should have been - it was never tested on pregnant mice hence devastating side effects were spotted too late.
In the case of the MMR vaccination millions of children have been given this with a minute amount of negative feedback. I consider this a risk well worth taking.
And yes, if I ever have children they will be getting the MMR vaccination.
Hotbeans
says...
4:56pm Wed 16 Nov 11
And then vaccination was introduced.
Think carefully what suits your outlook best, either MMR, Single Vaccinations or none at all. You don't have to mindlessly follow your doctors advice - after all, it's in their financial interest to get as many people immunised with MMR as possible. Some GP's refuse to give it to their own children even.
papa_melons
says...
4:58pm Wed 16 Nov 11
monkeymoo wrote:what is irresponsible is people like you going round spreading unfounded rumours that the MMR jab will cause harm, when there is CLEARLY no clinical evidence to support this view, despite extensive research into it.
AngelicDevil wrote:Parents used to have the choice of:
It is completely irresponsible to not vaccinate your child. Not only are you risking their life but others around you too! When it comes to things like this parents need to listen to the advice of the relevant health body. We are now seeing an alarming rise in diseases that were almost stamped out entirely. But then again a part of me thinks, if you're stupid enough to not vaccinate your children then perhaps you deserve the potentially fatal consequences of your actions.
1. Give their children the MMR jabs.
2. Give their children the separate injections, but they must pay for them.
3. Give their children no injections at all.
The Labour government removed choice "2" for all parents (unless you travel abroad and do it). Leaving only choices "1" and "3".
It is not irresponsible for a parent to choose not to give an injection to their child IF THEY BELIEVE THE INJECTION COULD CAUSE HARM to their child. Only a narrow minded person would think otherwise.
Does anyone remember things like Chicken pox, or Measles Parties? When 1 kid in the area caught one of these "diseases", the other mums would soon have all the kids round for a party. That way, the child would be exposed to it, and build up a natural immunity to it at an early age. Always worked out ok!
Hotbeans
says...
5:07pm Wed 16 Nov 11
What an awful dilemma facing parents and shocking they even have to face it. Single measles jab for us was the solution ultimately.
Tailgaters Anonymous
says...
5:37pm Wed 16 Nov 11
Secondly, how many parents can afford the cost of 'single vaccines' as these are not provided on the NHS?
Thirdly, this is not a new phenomenon, having been around for some 20 years.
AngelicDevil
says...
5:48pm Wed 16 Nov 11
Hotbeans wrote:If you read a little more into this you will find that around the age that a child is given the MMR is about the "right" age that autism begins to show.
So parents risk their child getting measles or getting permanent behavioural changes because of having the MMR. (It may have been 'discounted' but we know parents who swear it's happened to their child). What an awful dilemma facing parents and shocking they even have to face it. Single measles jab for us was the solution ultimately.
I can't believe people still believe this man's seriously flawed research that has been proved as such by other leading medical experts.
monkeymoo
says...
7:17pm Wed 16 Nov 11
papa_melons wrote:Papa_Melons...Clearl
monkeymoo wrote:what is irresponsible is people like you going round spreading unfounded rumours that the MMR jab will cause harm, when there is CLEARLY no clinical evidence to support this view, despite extensive research into it.AngelicDevil wrote: It is completely irresponsible to not vaccinate your child. Not only are you risking their life but others around you too! When it comes to things like this parents need to listen to the advice of the relevant health body. We are now seeing an alarming rise in diseases that were almost stamped out entirely. But then again a part of me thinks, if you're stupid enough to not vaccinate your children then perhaps you deserve the potentially fatal consequences of your actions.Parents used to have the choice of: 1. Give their children the MMR jabs. 2. Give their children the separate injections, but they must pay for them. 3. Give their children no injections at all. The Labour government removed choice "2" for all parents (unless you travel abroad and do it). Leaving only choices "1" and "3". It is not irresponsible for a parent to choose not to give an injection to their child IF THEY BELIEVE THE INJECTION COULD CAUSE HARM to their child. Only a narrow minded person would think otherwise. Does anyone remember things like Chicken pox, or Measles Parties? When 1 kid in the area caught one of these "diseases", the other mums would soon have all the kids round for a party. That way, the child would be exposed to it, and build up a natural immunity to it at an early age. Always worked out ok!
y you are a fool! If you bothered to read my other posts on this topic, you would actually see that i have given my children the MMR jabs. I also at no point "scaremonger" as you put it. I make no connection to anything, I only say that if parents believe the risk outweighs the benefits of ANYTHING, then it is their choice whether to give it to their child or not.
Now go learn to read Muppet!
monkeymoo
says...
7:26pm Wed 16 Nov 11
Classic! When you read the article, 9 people from 2 schools in hove were found to have it.
Hardly "Sweeping" through "Brighton AND Hove" is it!!?
Jenny Allan
says...
7:41pm Wed 16 Nov 11
I am quite sure that more parents would be prepared to vaccinate their children if they were given the choice of single measles vaccinations. These were part of the UK vaccination programme, prior to the introduction of the MMR vaccine in 1988. The first MMR vaccine, Pluserix, which contained the Urabe mumps component, was previously banned in Canada and withdrawn in the UK in 2002 after causing untold adverse reactions. Robert Fletcher, who was profoundly disabled by the MMR vaccine, was finally compensated by the UK government 18 years after receiving the MMR vaccine.
Don't blame parents for their worries. Give them a proven safe CHOICE of vaccine for their children.
monkeymoo
says...
8:39pm Wed 16 Nov 11
Jenny Allan wrote:Well informed and well presented. Hopefully your post will give the other "blinded" people on here a better view before they make their narrow minded opinions.
Measles is highly infectious and can be nasty, but parents understandably still have concerns about the MMR vaccine, which contains three live viruses. I am quite sure that more parents would be prepared to vaccinate their children if they were given the choice of single measles vaccinations. These were part of the UK vaccination programme, prior to the introduction of the MMR vaccine in 1988. The first MMR vaccine, Pluserix, which contained the Urabe mumps component, was previously banned in Canada and withdrawn in the UK in 2002 after causing untold adverse reactions. Robert Fletcher, who was profoundly disabled by the MMR vaccine, was finally compensated by the UK government 18 years after receiving the MMR vaccine. Don't blame parents for their worries. Give them a proven safe CHOICE of vaccine for their children.
It amazes me that some of the people saying "just give the MMR" don't even have children!
KeefyH44
says...
8:41pm Wed 16 Nov 11
a person
says...
8:54pm Wed 16 Nov 11
“””Does anyone remember things like Chicken pox, or Measles Parties? When 1 kid in the area caught one of these "diseases", the other mums would soon have all the kids round for a party. That way, the child would be exposed to it, and build up a natural immunity to it at an early age. Always worked out ok! “”
Yes in fact it was only about twenty odd years ago that children used to catch all
These illnesses at playschool..
It makes you wonder that if all these childhood illnesses are so deadly why are there so many
People still in the world ,
born long before the so called needed vaccinations.
Also don’t the doctors / drug companies do well out of them.
Informedperson
says...
9:33pm Wed 16 Nov 11
For instance, were you aware that the death rates from infectious diseases had decreased by more than 95% prior to mass vaccination in 1968? Scarlet fever declined in a similar fashion with no vaccination.
The main reason for this was improved nutrition, less crowded living conditions and clean drinking water.
If you were to study the subject you would also discover that outbreaks of particular diseases occur amongst highly vaccinated communities.
We are led to believe that when a certain level of antibodies are produced following a vaccination that this will lead to protection. However, the World Health Organisation has acknowledged that antibody levels do not indicate immunity.
All vaccines have side-effects, from allergies, asthma, epilepsy, diabetes, GBS, cot-death and enncephalitis, these are just a few conditions that vaccines are responsible for.
My daughter is completely unvaccinated, she contracted measles when she was 5 yrs old, she'd been in contact with a boy with measles, he was fully vaccinated.
I strongly suggest that you look into the subject thoroughly, at least then you can make an informed decision.
Informedperson
says...
10:07pm Wed 16 Nov 11
grace295
says...
10:21pm Wed 16 Nov 11
A few years later stupidly had another vaccine (can't remember which due to the brain hasn't worked properly since) and from then on suffered 4-5 years of the most horrific migraine headaches, constant for about 2 weeks at a time with a few hours break in between. My body was set off into the most horrific of autoimmune and neurological attacks. I know what hell I have been going thru for the past 15 yrs, can't imagine a child having to go thru this and I can imagine a parents lifetime denial that they had caused this to their child, but the least they can do is not let it happen again.
Look around you people, friends and family are dropping like flies with diseases that were not around before mass immunisation. I know 10 people suffering from "epileptic like seizures", some happened within 12 hrs of a vaccine, you would be just plain stupid if you called this a coincidence. A close relative proved in court that a vaccine had caused her Lupus and RA as well as other autoimmune disorders, drs agreed. We are turning into 1 very sick society, I will take childhood illnesses over vaccines anytime.
When they said aluminium was found in the brains of alzheimers patients and that mercury was causing neuro conditions, they made the aluminium can manufacturers line things with plastic and everyone rushed into get the mercury out of their teeth, so WHY are we now injecting this into our children. STUPID!!!!!!
beaucarrel
says...
10:38pm Wed 16 Nov 11
www.homoeopathicflu.
com
I have also just written a new book titled M.M.R this covers all childhood infectious diseases.
It is wise to consider all options, not just the ones which can and do cause severe suffering worse than the actual disease.
It is most irresponsible not to study all available information about vaccination, not doing so could give your child autism.
CHS
says...
11:21pm Wed 16 Nov 11
People see a rate of near 1 in 60 for autism in our schools but the Department of Health just shrug and pretend it is normal.
Informedperson
says...
11:35pm Wed 16 Nov 11
I ask one thing, when you visit the doctor for these vaccinations, whatever they might be, ask to see the vaccine insert which will inform you of all the side effects and most of the ingredients that are being injected into millions of babies. My guessing is that the doctor will refuse to show you, wonder why?
Informedperson
says...
11:45pm Wed 16 Nov 11
Tailgaters Anonymous wrote:Andrew Wakefield was not tied to any pharma companies, infact it was Brian Deer who has the links to drug companies.
Firstly, is this really news? Measles outbreaks have happened with alarming regularity since a certain doctor, tied in to certain drug companies, claimed there was a link to autism when children were given the MMR vaccine.
Secondly, how many parents can afford the cost of 'single vaccines' as these are not provided on the NHS?
Thirdly, this is not a new phenomenon, having been around for some 20 years.
Informedperson
says...
11:45pm Wed 16 Nov 11
Cash Cow
says...
12:51am Thu 17 Nov 11
Erwin Alber
says...
1:17am Thu 17 Nov 11
loveleesage
says...
8:07am Thu 17 Nov 11
http://vactruth.com/
2011/11/15/5-ways-do
ctors-seduce-mothers
/?utm_source=TheVacc
ineTruthNewsletter&u
tm_campaign=386d6334
57-10_31_2011_top5&u
tm_medium=email
Mrs Newcastle
says...
8:15am Thu 17 Nov 11
Erwin Alber
says...
8:37am Thu 17 Nov 11
This assault on children and crime against humankind should have been nipped in the bud right when this nonsense started about 200 years ago.
As it is, vaccinations have left a trail of mayhem and destruction. The multiple injection of chemical and biological agents into babies and children's organisms is going to result in an unprecedented disaster of gigantic proportions which may well take humankind to the point of no return.
Do not look at vaccination as disease prevention, but as a satanic ritual used to blight our children and a form of biochemical warfare against civilians.
Hotbeans
says...
9:13am Thu 17 Nov 11
Erwin Alber wrote:Precisely, just read the complete list of ingredients in the MMR vaccine people and add that into your decision making process.
I'd much rather that my child got the childhood diseases that the MMR vaccine is supposed to (but does not) prevent, than MMR-induced autism. To me, it's a no-brainer really, especially as the rubella component of the MMR is cultured on a cell line derived from aborted human foetus tissue and the measles component on measles virus- infected eggs. The vaccine is consequently contaminated with bits of bird viruses. There is therefore just no way I would let any of these brainwashed needle nuts get near any child of mine.
Hotbeans
says...
9:34am Thu 17 Nov 11
Informedperson wrote:Because they want to get their quota of immunisations and therefore another heap of cash.
Grace, l've heard of cases like yours all too often and l'm so sorry that you are in bad health.
I ask one thing, when you visit the doctor for these vaccinations, whatever they might be, ask to see the vaccine insert which will inform you of all the side effects and most of the ingredients that are being injected into millions of babies. My guessing is that the doctor will refuse to show you, wonder why?
Thanks to the interweb all this info is available online!
MediumRare
says...
9:36am Thu 17 Nov 11
Erwin Alber wrote:Oh dear oh dear. I do have children, two of them, who have both had the MMR without any side affect whatsoever.
I'd much rather that my child got the childhood diseases that the MMR vaccine is supposed to (but does not) prevent, than MMR-induced autism. To me, it's a no-brainer really, especially as the rubella component of the MMR is cultured on a cell line derived from aborted human foetus tissue and the measles component on measles virus- infected eggs. The vaccine is consequently contaminated with bits of bird viruses. There is therefore just no way I would let any of these brainwashed needle nuts get near any child of mine.
The reason there is a measles outbreak in Brighton is that it seems to attract the sort of idiotic middle class conspiracy theorist who would rather search the internet for years to find a couple of pages that support their paranoia than trust someone who has had literally years of training (in my GPs case specialised in Paediatrics). The MMR / Autism link has been disproved by every same medical thinker for literally years. You should maybe read Send in the idiots by Kamran Nazeer, an autistic himself who debunks it rather nicely.
CHS
says...
9:54am Thu 17 Nov 11
Frankly, the situation is no better on the part of government and the medical profession than hit and run. Even more blatant, recently, has been the denial over damage from HPV vaccine.
beaucarrel
says...
9:57am Thu 17 Nov 11
If all parent are made aware of the effectriveness of homoeopathy then they will be well displeased if their child goes through much uneccesary suffering all because of the ego given to doctors and nurses during training/brainwashin
g.
get my free book on homoeopathic treatment for influenza and Measles
www.homoeopathicflu .com
beaucarrel
says...
10:17am Thu 17 Nov 11
MediumRare
says...
10:20am Thu 17 Nov 11
CHS
says...
10:34am Thu 17 Nov 11
With regard to the Amish the situation is more complicated. When Dan Olmsted was reporting on this c2005 they didn't vaccinate much and autism was rare. Since then a lot of pressure has been brought to bear on the community, and probably many of them do. They would make a superb group for a vaccinated/unvaccina
ted study (which is why it won't happen).
anonymous coward
says...
11:02am Thu 17 Nov 11
The sheer number of people who haven't the faintest clue about a subject they feel the need to spout off on is staggering. How is it possible to be so wrong and to be so unaware of the damage that you are causing?
If you do not vaccinate your child you decrease the herd immunity of our species. As the herd immunity decreases those too young to be vaccinated (who are also those most likely to die from it) have an increasing chance of catching it.
Recorded incidents historically have seen 1 in 3 people die.
If you hold opinion in the face of all scientific evidence then there is something very wrong with your head.
If you think there is something wrong with science as a whole then I hope you are not so hypocritical as to continue using your household appliances, medical services, worldwide media networks, etc. I'll let you have your unnatural longevity, wealth and health because, unlike you, I'm not a petty minded idiot.
Informedperson
says...
11:07am Thu 17 Nov 11
There's no conspiracy, apart from from the pHARMa industry. ME/CFS, MS, GBS, allergies, meningitis, etc, weren't around when l was a child, in the 70's, why is that? We used to all have peanut butter sandwiches in our school packed lunchboxes, however, on a recent school trip my daughter was told nobody whatsoever was allowed to even bring anything with peanuts onto the coach, even if it was for their own consumption.
Re vaccine efficacy - There have consistently been reports of epidemics in fully vaccinated populations since the vaccines introduction (Shasby et al., Weiner et al., 1977; Hull et al., 1985).
A typical example was reported by Dr. Tracy Gustafson and colleagues in the New England Journal of Medicine. During the spring of 1985, a measles outbreak occurred in two fully vaccinated secondary-school populations (greater than 99 percent of students vaccinated). On serologic testing, 95 percent of students showed immunity to measles. The epidemic occurred in the remaining 5 percent, all of whom had been "adequately" vaccinated (Gustafson et al., 1987).
A good website to look at if you are actually interested in looking at proper information, is www.informedparent.c
o.uk.
gajp01
says...
11:17am Thu 17 Nov 11
s.org/2011/10/14/big
-study-vaccinated-ki
ds-2-5-more-diseases
-than-unvaccinated
Lorrales
says...
11:36am Thu 17 Nov 11
AngelicDevil wrote:I feel it's very irresponsible for parents to abandon responsibility for their childrens health to the Department of Health/Government and pharmacutical companys which are all financially driven. Every parent I know who vaccinated did not look further than their GP for information. Anyone who doesn't research the subject and just follows the herd has no right to vote on mandatory vaccination. If evidence of certain vaccine damage does not exsist it's because it hasn't been looked for, if you only look to disprove something you will not find evidence of it....proper trials have not been carried out where the vaccine is tested against a saline placebo; a vaccine is given and tested against someone given another different vaccine. Even so if you get the packet insert that comes with a vaccine you will see a whole range of vaccine reactions listed including death. Also, recently in America parents won a fight in court that recognised vaccination caused their children's Autism. The studies used to prove the MMR safe and discredit Dr Wakefield have since been proven unreliable and discredited themselves. I just love it how the press didn't identify how many of the older children involved in their report were unvaccinated/vaccina
I'm afraid it IS irresponsible for a parent to choose not to give their child a vaccination that has been used for many, many years with no link ever proven to anything! Parents DO NOT always know best, unfortunately you do not have to be a genius in order to breed. And no, I do not remember chicken pox/measles parties. The problem is not necessarily about your "healthy" child catching it but an immune deficient person\child or a pregnant woman being unwittingly exposed to one of these diseases. That is where the biggest danger lies. As I said before, if people want to be daft and believe what so and so's says about something then go for it. But don't blame anyone when your child dies because there's been plenty of information given out to prevent these diseases becoming epidemics like they once were.
ted and instead left it to the gullible public to assume an unvaccinated child started the outbreak. Even if an unvaccinated child was ill with measles perhaps they caught it from a recently vaccinated child. If you look further you'll find that the incidence and death rate from all infectious childhood diseases fell dramatically with the introduction of better sanitation and living conditions and the rate of decline didn't increase with the introduction of vaccination. In the western hemisphere the only cases of polio are vaccine induced. I personally don't think the route to good health is through poisoning our bodies and vaccine ingredients alert my sensibilities so I chose not to have my children's perfectly healthy bloodstreams injected with toxic chemicals and risk the possible side effects the vaccine manufacturers list. THAT IS MY RIGHT! I also have to wonder how parents who place their faith in vaccination and have their children vaccinated can feel so threatened by an unvaccinated child - vaccination doesn't work 100% even with 100% coverage so it's unreasonable to expect others to risk the side effects that those who choose vaccination seem to ignore or perhaps they cross their fingers when the needle plunges through the skin and past the first line of defense against infection! The general health of the vaccinated has not been compared against the unvaccinated but my children, now 15 years and 12 years, did not have constant runny noses, they have no allergies or asthma. To date they each have only ever needed and taken one course of antibiotics. Perhaps the nation would be healthier if parents were better informed.
MediumRare
says...
11:55am Thu 17 Nov 11
try the WHO, BMA. JCVI and CSM. Real science as opposed to junk science. Shall I google them for you?
CHS
says...
12:00pm Thu 17 Nov 11
Real science or real crony capitalism? Incidentally, the CSM ceased exist a decade ago, so you may have a little difficulty contacting them.
keepinformed
says...
12:09pm Thu 17 Nov 11
Informedperson wrote:Do keep this in mind. In the UK we always hear from the media references to Wakefield's "discredited" studies. Discredited where and by whom? In the UK, but not in other countries. Why is this? I simply ask the question, without coming down on one side or the other. Is a possible reason that the Government-funded NHS would be clobbered by huge compensation claims if ever they endorsed research in other countries that demonstrates a link between MMR and autism? Remember that the Blairs, at the height of the controversy, refused point blank to say whether Leo had had the MMR. It has since been claimed they took him somewhere for the single vaccines - and I'd still support that option as there was never any concern shown about these, only about the triple vaccine.
Also please be aware that Andrew Wakefields studies have been replicated many times since by other doctors, in other countries, but then if you'd looked into this properly you'd know that, right?
The other thing is the huge hysteria about measles being a killer disease. It used just to be a childhood developmental disease; only children who had severely compromised immune systems died of it. Parents knew how to manage it to reduce the risk of complications. Everyone caught it, was ill, got better and life went on.
Lorrales
says...
12:16pm Thu 17 Nov 11
anonymous coward wrote:It seems to me that many parents, better informed than myself, speaking out against vaccination have refered to their source of information, documents and studies etc, whereas people like yourself have refered to nothing to back up their argument.....for a moment when I started reading your comment I thought it was directed at those who support compulsory vaccination because that's my sentiment exactly about people who would force me to do so despite all the available evidence.
I see this article has brought out the absolutely worst of the Argus' Daily Mail reading, mentally retarded, selfish, short sighted, bigoted readers. The sheer number of people who haven't the faintest clue about a subject they feel the need to spout off on is staggering. How is it possible to be so wrong and to be so unaware of the damage that you are causing? If you do not vaccinate your child you decrease the herd immunity of our species. As the herd immunity decreases those too young to be vaccinated (who are also those most likely to die from it) have an increasing chance of catching it. Recorded incidents historically have seen 1 in 3 people die. If you hold opinion in the face of all scientific evidence then there is something very wrong with your head. If you think there is something wrong with science as a whole then I hope you are not so hypocritical as to continue using your household appliances, medical services, worldwide media networks, etc. I'll let you have your unnatural longevity, wealth and health because, unlike you, I'm not a petty minded idiot.
MediumRare
says...
12:26pm Thu 17 Nov 11
CHS wrote:I hope you're not inferring Doctors are an industry because if you are you're even thicker than I gave you credit for. A decade seems about the right length of time the MMR / Autism link has been disproved. You'll be telling me no one ever landed on the moon next....
MediumRare
Real science or real crony capitalism? Incidentally, the CSM ceased exist a decade ago, so you may have a little difficulty contacting them.
Justin
says...
12:30pm Thu 17 Nov 11
CHS
says...
12:37pm Thu 17 Nov 11
The problem doctors have is that they are dependent on vaccination for their income, it is professionally dangerous to question the authority of the DH, and they are obviously also scared to call into question the safety of their own practice. This is to point out the very high levels of institutional leverage, and the need to believe you are doing a good job. However, such is the level of institutional bias that the unsafety of the vaccine programme is virtually ensured.
Informedperson
says...
12:38pm Thu 17 Nov 11
I have many references from BMJ and the Lancet showing vaccines to be ineffective and dangerous. Please state references where you sourced your mis-information.
keepinformed
says...
12:41pm Thu 17 Nov 11
Lorrales
says...
12:41pm Thu 17 Nov 11
MediumRare wrote:How mindless...You won't catch something just because you are not innoculated with it. To imply so is just scaremongering....an
Let's hope none of you anti inoculators want to send your kids off travelling when they're older. You wouldn't want them coming back like Ian Dury.
d it is possible to catch something you are innoculated with. However, the only certificate of vaccination a traveller needs is for yellow fever and that's only if you come from or travel through a country with yellow fever.
MediumRare
says...
12:51pm Thu 17 Nov 11
CHS wrote:The first part is nonsense. They get an additional income for being successful at prevention measures (which are cheaper to the country as a whole) that include vaccinations (because they work) and cervical cancer smears.
MediumRare
The problem doctors have is that they are dependent on vaccination for their income, it is professionally dangerous to question the authority of the DH, and they are obviously also scared to call into question the safety of their own practice. This is to point out the very high levels of institutional leverage, and the need to believe you are doing a good job. However, such is the level of institutional bias that the unsafety of the vaccine programme is virtually ensured.
keepinformed
says...
12:54pm Thu 17 Nov 11
Davi Faust
says...
1:08pm Thu 17 Nov 11
Informedperson
says...
1:09pm Thu 17 Nov 11
A health visitor once said to me 'l haven't vaccinated any of my children, but you didn't hear that from me.' Why is this such a controversial subject?
A friend of mines son died a week after his DTP vaccine at 6 months old, she fought for justice for 5 years, he was previously healthy. Nobody has the right to tell parents what to do and l just ask that all parents reading this at least ask to read the vaccine insert before a vaccine is administered. All medication comes with instructions, side-effects and ingredients, most people have a read prior to taking any meds. Just do the same with vaccines, it makes sense.
keepinformed
says...
1:17pm Thu 17 Nov 11
Lorrales
says...
1:20pm Thu 17 Nov 11
Informedperson wrote:Also, the CDC have an adult vaccination schedule in the US. I wonder how many adults in the UK who would have children forcibly vaccinated go along for the MMR shot....
To these people who are suggesting the MMR jab should be compulsory - do you all have the flu jab? If not, why not? Surely the same thing applies with the flu, supposedly a highly infectious disease that can cause death, or are you not sufficently brainwashed yet to believe that flu is dangerous? Same with chicken pox, there's a vaccine for that too. I have many references from BMJ and the Lancet showing vaccines to be ineffective and dangerous. Please state references where you sourced your mis-information.
Ashles
says...
1:21pm Thu 17 Nov 11
g."
I agree, everyone should made aware of the effectiveness of homoeopathy - then nobody would ever use it. It has been discredited in study after study as completely ineffective (hardly surpsising as it consists literally of nothing but water).
The Lancet published an extensive meta-analysis of all available studies - again demonstrated to be completely ineffective.
There are thousands of studies demonstrating without doubt homoeopathy does nothing - yet some people still convince themselves it does. I wonder who is really brainwashed?
Now if you claim it is effective and you can demonstrate it, you can win One Million Dollars. All you have to do is devise a test that can demonstrate, any way you like, that a bottle of homoeopathic 'medicine' is different from a bottle of water.
Then go here: http://www.randi.org
/site/index.php/1m-c
hallenge.html
Think you can do this?
MediumRare
says...
1:23pm Thu 17 Nov 11
Lorrales wrote:http://www.who.int/v
anonymous coward wrote:It seems to me that many parents, better informed than myself, speaking out against vaccination have refered to their source of information, documents and studies etc, whereas people like yourself have refered to nothing to back up their argument.....for a moment when I started reading your comment I thought it was directed at those who support compulsory vaccination because that's my sentiment exactly about people who would force me to do so despite all the available evidence.
I see this article has brought out the absolutely worst of the Argus' Daily Mail reading, mentally retarded, selfish, short sighted, bigoted readers. The sheer number of people who haven't the faintest clue about a subject they feel the need to spout off on is staggering. How is it possible to be so wrong and to be so unaware of the damage that you are causing? If you do not vaccinate your child you decrease the herd immunity of our species. As the herd immunity decreases those too young to be vaccinated (who are also those most likely to die from it) have an increasing chance of catching it. Recorded incidents historically have seen 1 in 3 people die. If you hold opinion in the face of all scientific evidence then there is something very wrong with your head. If you think there is something wrong with science as a whole then I hope you are not so hypocritical as to continue using your household appliances, medical services, worldwide media networks, etc. I'll let you have your unnatural longevity, wealth and health because, unlike you, I'm not a petty minded idiot.
accine_safety/topics
/mmr/mmr_autism/en/
*cough*
KeefyH44
says...
1:40pm Thu 17 Nov 11
beaucarrel wrote:Hmmm, wasn't homeopathy debunked recently.
I shall now be asking patients, friends and relatives to ask their doctors and nurses why they are not using this safe effective cheap form of healing in order to save children from unneccesary suffering, it is easy to use and causes no harm, do they not have a duty of care to use what is available? Or are they soley in the power of the big pharma
If all parent are made aware of the effectriveness of homoeopathy then they will be well displeased if their child goes through much uneccesary suffering all because of the ego given to doctors and nurses during training/brainwashin
g.
get my free book on homoeopathic treatment for influenza and Measles
www.homoeopathicflu .com
keepinformed
says...
1:53pm Thu 17 Nov 11
Exactly the same happens with homoeopathy. Saying these remedies contain nothing is because of one big mistake: orthodox medicines are deemed to work on the chemical level. No advocate of homoeopathy thinks that's how the remedies work, because it's fairly obvious that any of the original substance must be microscopic if you keep diluting it.
The remedies are succussed (if they aren't, they don't work), and so it seems they must work on the level of physics. Look at it that way, and the argument "there's nothing in it" vanishes.
If you take the wrong remedy it doesn't work: precision is everything in homoeopathic prescribing. Millions of people are treated successfully with homoeopathy which has no side-effects. Whatever you think, don't knock it: most UK patients pay for homoeopathic treatment and, if nothing else, they're saving NHS money.
tamarque
says...
1:55pm Thu 17 Nov 11
The vaccine has never been proven safe or effective--just like all the other vaccines.
What is notable in this article is the the miniscule number of cases reported. 9 cases, or even 18 are a laughable number. Given the number of children who are regressively autistic after vaccinations, it is impossible to take a couple of cases of measles seriously. Good for those kids--they will have healthier bodies for the experience. Sorry for the families who live thru a few days with an unhappy child.
Despite the false belief systems of many people who know not when they are being manipulated, it is a very responsible parent who refuses to inject their child with poisons.
Hautman Homeopathy
says...
2:00pm Thu 17 Nov 11
Are they safe? What exactly is in them?
Are they effective? Have they been tested for long term safety and effectiveness?
Are they necessary? What are the real risks today of the diseases they are supposed to prevent?
These are the questions that not enough is widely known about. For more info, including some answers to these questions, see: http://www.hautmanho
meopathy.com/home/va
ccine-awareness
keepinformed
says...
2:09pm Thu 17 Nov 11
KeefyH44
says...
2:24pm Thu 17 Nov 11
tamarque wrote:Measles is not a dangerous illness! You really are selective in what you believe. It's just like trying to disprove the existence of GOD! If someone has faith in his/her existence, NO argument will convince them otherwise.
Measles is not a dangerous illness. Further, once a child has gotten the illness, they have lifetime immunity. This is how the body builds real immunity.
The vaccine has never been proven safe or effective--just like all the other vaccines.
What is notable in this article is the the miniscule number of cases reported. 9 cases, or even 18 are a laughable number. Given the number of children who are regressively autistic after vaccinations, it is impossible to take a couple of cases of measles seriously. Good for those kids--they will have healthier bodies for the experience. Sorry for the families who live thru a few days with an unhappy child.
Despite the false belief systems of many people who know not when they are being manipulated, it is a very responsible parent who refuses to inject their child with poisons.
Ashles
says...
2:30pm Thu 17 Nov 11
Not really - it comes down to scientific evidence and replicability of experiments. Actual medicine has this, homoeopathy does not.
"There's stacks of evidence showing homoeopathy is effective - if it weren't, it would have died out years ago."
That's a circular argument. So where is this 'stacks of evidence'? If you actually do any research all you find is huge amounts of evidence showing that it doesn't work.
"Most of the evidence is briskly denounced as "anecdotal", but doctors use such evidence all the time with conventional medicine - but it sounds more convincing because they call it "clinical evidence" or "empirical evidence". " Yes - that's why they do controlled trials, double-blind studies to compensate for this. Which homoeopathy fails time and time again.
"So, a GP will prescribe you with something that isn't licensed for your symptoms, but it's been shown to work over and over in many patients who do have your symptoms."
Still waiting to see links to these trials.
"Exactly the same happens with homoeopathy. Saying these remedies contain nothing is because of one big mistake: orthodox medicines are deemed to work on the chemical level." Except for the ones that don't like radiotherapy.
"No advocate of homoeopathy thinks that's how the remedies work, because it's fairly obvious that any of the original substance must be microscopic if you keep diluting it." Not even microscopic - in most homoeopathic remedies the odds are high that there is not a single molecule of active ingredient in the bottle.
But anyway that's entirely irrelevent - the trials are simply to test if homoeopathy has an effect - in the first instance it doesn't matter what the mechanism is thought to be. Even if it worked by pure magic, if patients responded to homoeopathy in numbers greater than the application of pure water then this would indicate there was something to study, some real effect beyond chance or placebo. But they don't. So it is entirely irrelevent to propose a mechanism for something that doesn't actually have any real effect.
"The remedies are succussed (if they aren't, they don't work), and so it seems they must work on the level of physics. Look at it that way, and the argument "there's nothing in it" vanishes."
Except that it doesn't work - again discussion of mechanism and the 'physics' behind it is irrelevent.
"If you take the wrong remedy it doesn't work: precision is everything in homoeopathic prescribing. Millions of people are treated successfully with homoeopathy which has no side-effects. Whatever you think, don't knock it: most UK patients pay for homoeopathic treatment and, if nothing else, they're saving NHS money."
Is that really the best defense of homoeopathy? It might not work, but at least people are spending money on it instead of getting actually effective treatments on the NHS?
The biggest problem with homoeopathy is that people are emotionally invested in it, and refuse to believe it might not work, even when all the scientific evidence indicates that it doesn't.
Also isn't it interesting how homoeopathy only tends to be used on conditions and ailments that would disappear quite normally by themselves. Never anything serious or ongoing where an effective treatment would be startling.
KeefyH44
says...
2:34pm Thu 17 Nov 11
Ashles wrote:Sadly, as I said, it's like trying to disprove the existence of God to the faithful. Can't be did. Homeopathy IS effective, purely as a placebo. Any serious genuine illness cannot be cured by it. Isn't it supposed to work by stimulating the body's own defences. Oh we already have that, it's called Vaccination!
"If all parent are made aware of the effectriveness of homoeopathy then they will be well displeased if their child goes through much uneccesary suffering all because of the ego given to doctors and nurses during training/brainwashin
g."
I agree, everyone should made aware of the effectiveness of homoeopathy - then nobody would ever use it. It has been discredited in study after study as completely ineffective (hardly surpsising as it consists literally of nothing but water).
The Lancet published an extensive meta-analysis of all available studies - again demonstrated to be completely ineffective.
There are thousands of studies demonstrating without doubt homoeopathy does nothing - yet some people still convince themselves it does. I wonder who is really brainwashed?
Now if you claim it is effective and you can demonstrate it, you can win One Million Dollars. All you have to do is devise a test that can demonstrate, any way you like, that a bottle of homoeopathic 'medicine' is different from a bottle of water.
Then go here: http://www.randi.org
/site/index.php/1m-c
hallenge.html
Think you can do this?
Ashles
says...
2:36pm Thu 17 Nov 11
Anaesthetics are poisonous - presumably if your child needs surgery you will forbid them to have anaesthesia? Would that be what a 'responsible parent' would do?
It's really embarassing when people talk nonsense like this - some substances which are 'poisonous' or harmful in some doses can still save your life.
keepinformed
says...
3:14pm Thu 17 Nov 11
Placebo, of course, is one possibility. This is effective in conventional medicine, too. In both systems it is difficult to determine what's got better through placebo and what through the prescription.
Double-blind trials and so forth are all very well, but that's a protocol for drugs that work on the chemical level and that are prescribed for specific symptoms. Homoeopathic remedies are prescribed for the patient, not the disease, so there really isn't a flu remedy or a dermatitis remedy. A trial that uses, say, Sulphur for dermatitis or Gelsemium for flu is bound to fail because those remedies have been used on the basis of an illness rather than the person who's sick, so most of the patients won't respond to the remedy.
As to evidence, there are plenty of volumes of cases treated successfully by homoeopathy, and this includes serious diseases, not just a cold that would clear up anyway. Any professional homoeopath can give you examples of people with such grave illnesses who have recovered under their care.
Most often new patients turn to homoeopathy because conventional medicine hasn't worked - the reverse of what's suggested that somehow homoeopaths are wickedly keeping people from doctors! In fact, homoeopaths do refer patients on to doctors: they have to know when, and that is part of their training.
Homoeopathy isn't like vaccination: it doesn't aim to confer immunity for a disease, so that is a false analogy. It treats those who are sick, a remedy being prescribed that matches the totality of the patient's symptoms, not just his or her presenting symptoms.
Homoeopathy stimulates the immune system to heal itself. Everyone knows that we have amazing recuperative abilities, but sometimes get stuck in illness and need help. Good homoeopathic therapy will bring about what orthodox medicine calls "spontaneous remission". The remedy itself doesn't heal: the patient's own immune system does that.
A final thought: every day, orthodox medicine maims and kills patient after patient. Homoeopathy does neither.
Lorrales
says...
3:20pm Thu 17 Nov 11
MediumRare wrote:You do not know what they would have been like without vaccination? Therefore you can not know they had 'the mmr without any side effect whatsoever'.
Erwin Alber wrote: I'd much rather that my child got the childhood diseases that the MMR vaccine is supposed to (but does not) prevent, than MMR-induced autism. To me, it's a no-brainer really, especially as the rubella component of the MMR is cultured on a cell line derived from aborted human foetus tissue and the measles component on measles virus- infected eggs. The vaccine is consequently contaminated with bits of bird viruses. There is therefore just no way I would let any of these brainwashed needle nuts get near any child of mine.Oh dear oh dear. I do have children, two of them, who have both had the MMR without any side affect whatsoever. The reason there is a measles outbreak in Brighton is that it seems to attract the sort of idiotic middle class conspiracy theorist who would rather search the internet for years to find a couple of pages that support their paranoia than trust someone who has had literally years of training (in my GPs case specialised in Paediatrics). The MMR / Autism link has been disproved by every same medical thinker for literally years. You should maybe read Send in the idiots by Kamran Nazeer, an autistic himself who debunks it rather nicely.
Ashles
says...
3:40pm Thu 17 Nov 11
No, that's completely incorrect - it is a protocol applicable to anything. It is simply a method of compensating for knowing when you are receiving the treatment or not. So, much as you keep trying to cling to the excuse of 'it's not chemical so you can't test it', this is just not true. You test the effect - to start with the mechanism is irrelevant. You could test for dowsing or mind reading or remote viewing using a double-blind protocol - it's nothing to do with exclusively chemical based testing.
"As to evidence, there are plenty of volumes of cases treated successfully by homoeopathy, and this includes serious diseases, not just a cold that would clear up anyway. Any professional homoeopath can give you examples of people with such grave illnesses who have recovered under their care."
But none ever properly documented? I ask again for links to these remarkable instances - they would be very widely reported.
"Most often new patients turn to homoeopathy because conventional medicine hasn't worked - the reverse of what's suggested that somehow homoeopaths are wickedly keeping people from doctors! In fact, homoeopaths do refer patients on to doctors: they have to know when, and that is part of their training."
And that's another worrying thing - that homoeopaths in any way feel qualified to 'refer' patients to doctors! Homoeopaths are not medically trained and have no more right to 'refer' individuals to doctors than the average man on the street. The very first words out of any homoeopaths mouth should be 'Go to a doctor'.
"Homoeopathy isn't like vaccination: it doesn't aim to confer immunity for a disease, so that is a false analogy. It treats those who are sick, a remedy being prescribed that matches the totality of the patient's symptoms, not just his or her presenting symptoms"
Which would be nice if it actually worked. But evidence shows it doesn't. Again, it is pointless to discuss mechanisms or processes until it has been demonstrated that there really is an effect that actually requires explanation.
"Homoeopathy stimulates the immune system to heal itself. Everyone knows that we have amazing recuperative abilities, but sometimes get stuck in illness and need help. Good homoeopathic therapy will bring about what orthodox medicine calls "spontaneous remission". The remedy itself doesn't heal: the patient's own immune system does that."
The patient's own immune system does that without the benefit of homoeopathy - the only difference is homoeopaths try to take credit when the body recovers naturally.
"A final thought: every day, orthodox medicine maims and kills patient after patient. Homoeopathy does neither."
That's just ridiculous almost to the point of being childish. I'm sure if you developed a serious illness you'd be down the hospital as quickly as anyone else.
Just earlier you said part of a homoeopath's 'training' was to send people to doctors - why would they do that if orthodox medicine is so bad? It's a simple fact that 'orthodox medicine' (ie medicine) has drastically increased life spans and quality of life across the world.
Homoeopathy, as you correctly point out, has had no effect.
Ashles
says...
3:51pm Thu 17 Nov 11
Lorrales wrote:Yes, perhaps they would have had superpowers - **** that evil MMR and it's effect of leaving children only normal and healthy.
MediumRare wrote:You do not know what they would have been like without vaccination? Therefore you can not know they had 'the mmr without any side effect whatsoever'.Erwin Alber wrote: I'd much rather that my child got the childhood diseases that the MMR vaccine is supposed to (but does not) prevent, than MMR-induced autism. To me, it's a no-brainer really, especially as the rubella component of the MMR is cultured on a cell line derived from aborted human foetus tissue and the measles component on measles virus- infected eggs. The vaccine is consequently contaminated with bits of bird viruses. There is therefore just no way I would let any of these brainwashed needle nuts get near any child of mine.Oh dear oh dear. I do have children, two of them, who have both had the MMR without any side affect whatsoever. The reason there is a measles outbreak in Brighton is that it seems to attract the sort of idiotic middle class conspiracy theorist who would rather search the internet for years to find a couple of pages that support their paranoia than trust someone who has had literally years of training (in my GPs case specialised in Paediatrics). The MMR / Autism link has been disproved by every same medical thinker for literally years. You should maybe read Send in the idiots by Kamran Nazeer, an autistic himself who debunks it rather nicely.
Ashles
says...
3:52pm Thu 17 Nov 11
keepinformed
says...
4:37pm Thu 17 Nov 11
gov.uk/index/hss/com
plementary-alternati
ve-medicine.htm The reason why this isn't widely reported? You tell me: it's negligent to say the least for it not to be. Is it Big Pharma? Perhaps it's money. Who knows - I don't, but I find it sad.
Not medically trained? I wonder what Ahsles means by that. The routes to professional qualifications are three years full time, or four/five years part-time, and this includes training by doctors who ensure that homoeopaths know when to refer. There is training also in anatomy & physiology, pathology and disease. This is medical training: compare it with other branches of medicine. This does not equate with "any man in the street" referring people to doctors. These are responsible medical professionals who are trained when to do so.
When do homoeopaths refer? When the law requires it (e.g. 'notifiable disease'). When patients have weighed up their treatment options and wish involvement of the GP (then the GP receives a case history). When there is a mechanical problem requiring e.g. physiotherapy, orthopaedics or surgery. There are other reasons, but otherwise homoeopaths provide a complete system of medicine (not surgery). Dental work is a case in point: if your teeth are misaligned, or a tooth's gone bad, the homoeopath would tell you to see your dentist.
The homoeopath would explain to the patient what the treatment options are, what therapy can be offered and, if the patient goes to the homoeopath in the first instance, what the conventional alternatives are. As I wrote earlier, patients often self-refer to a homoeopath because they want an alternative to conventional medicine. The patient makes an informed decision.
Parents enquiring about vaccination alternatives are given information and encouraged to compare it with the conventional route.
Please don't rubbish my statement that conventional medicine maims and kills - it does this every day. Current scandals about poor treatment in hospitals are too widespread to ignore, as are the frequent reports of drugs having appalling side-effects when those same double-blind-trialle
d drugs have seemingly gone through every test available. This has to be considered honestly.
Conventional medicine also, of course, does a massive amount of good and only a fool would deny that - or my previous paragraph. If I were in an RTA or fell and broke my leg, of course I'd go to hospital: remedies would assist my recovery, but if I needed to be repaired mechanically, then to hospital I would go without hesitation.
MediumRare
says...
5:35pm Thu 17 Nov 11
Lorrales wrote:Boy aged 5 never missed a day of school. Registered gifted & talented. Never had measles.
MediumRare wrote:You do not know what they would have been like without vaccination? Therefore you can not know they had 'the mmr without any side effect whatsoever'.
Erwin Alber wrote: I'd much rather that my child got the childhood diseases that the MMR vaccine is supposed to (but does not) prevent, than MMR-induced autism. To me, it's a no-brainer really, especially as the rubella component of the MMR is cultured on a cell line derived from aborted human foetus tissue and the measles component on measles virus- infected eggs. The vaccine is consequently contaminated with bits of bird viruses. There is therefore just no way I would let any of these brainwashed needle nuts get near any child of mine.Oh dear oh dear. I do have children, two of them, who have both had the MMR without any side affect whatsoever. The reason there is a measles outbreak in Brighton is that it seems to attract the sort of idiotic middle class conspiracy theorist who would rather search the internet for years to find a couple of pages that support their paranoia than trust someone who has had literally years of training (in my GPs case specialised in Paediatrics). The MMR / Autism link has been disproved by every same medical thinker for literally years. You should maybe read Send in the idiots by Kamran Nazeer, an autistic himself who debunks it rather nicely.
Girl aged 13 months. Walking and starting to talk (which autistics can't). Never had measles.
You're an idiot.
Ced
says...
6:09pm Thu 17 Nov 11
Lorrales
says...
6:13pm Thu 17 Nov 11
MediumRare wrote:You can not know for certain they are unaffected, but I'm very glad they seem unharmed unlike one on here who thinks unvaccinated children deserve 'potentially fatal consequences'. My children....Girl aged 15yrs, home educated, only recently took antibiotics for the very first time in her life. Boy aged 13yrs, home educated until he started secondary school, in top sets and has never missed a day, and has also only ever taken one course of antibiotics. You have a long way to go before you can compare! Why is it those who want to forcibly vaccinate children also throw insults...I know why, they're bullies!!!
Lorrales wrote:Boy aged 5 never missed a day of school. Registered gifted & talented. Never had measles. Girl aged 13 months. Walking and starting to talk (which autistics can't). Never had measles. You're an idiot.MediumRare wrote:You do not know what they would have been like without vaccination? Therefore you can not know they had 'the mmr without any side effect whatsoever'.Erwin Alber wrote: I'd much rather that my child got the childhood diseases that the MMR vaccine is supposed to (but does not) prevent, than MMR-induced autism. To me, it's a no-brainer really, especially as the rubella component of the MMR is cultured on a cell line derived from aborted human foetus tissue and the measles component on measles virus- infected eggs. The vaccine is consequently contaminated with bits of bird viruses. There is therefore just no way I would let any of these brainwashed needle nuts get near any child of mine.Oh dear oh dear. I do have children, two of them, who have both had the MMR without any side affect whatsoever. The reason there is a measles outbreak in Brighton is that it seems to attract the sort of idiotic middle class conspiracy theorist who would rather search the internet for years to find a couple of pages that support their paranoia than trust someone who has had literally years of training (in my GPs case specialised in Paediatrics). The MMR / Autism link has been disproved by every same medical thinker for literally years. You should maybe read Send in the idiots by Kamran Nazeer, an autistic himself who debunks it rather nicely.
Lorrales
says...
6:30pm Thu 17 Nov 11
Ashles wrote:It doesn't leave 'children only normal and healthy'. What is normal and healthy nowadays? Too many children suffer with allergies, asthma, autism, cancer and many other ailments. Trivialising it just makes you an ill informed comedian.
Lorrales wrote:Yes, perhaps they would have had superpowers - **** that evil MMR and it's effect of leaving children only normal and healthy.MediumRare wrote:You do not know what they would have been like without vaccination? Therefore you can not know they had 'the mmr without any side effect whatsoever'.Erwin Alber wrote: I'd much rather that my child got the childhood diseases that the MMR vaccine is supposed to (but does not) prevent, than MMR-induced autism. To me, it's a no-brainer really, especially as the rubella component of the MMR is cultured on a cell line derived from aborted human foetus tissue and the measles component on measles virus- infected eggs. The vaccine is consequently contaminated with bits of bird viruses. There is therefore just no way I would let any of these brainwashed needle nuts get near any child of mine.Oh dear oh dear. I do have children, two of them, who have both had the MMR without any side affect whatsoever. The reason there is a measles outbreak in Brighton is that it seems to attract the sort of idiotic middle class conspiracy theorist who would rather search the internet for years to find a couple of pages that support their paranoia than trust someone who has had literally years of training (in my GPs case specialised in Paediatrics). The MMR / Autism link has been disproved by every same medical thinker for literally years. You should maybe read Send in the idiots by Kamran Nazeer, an autistic himself who debunks it rather nicely.
MediumRare
says...
6:40pm Thu 17 Nov 11
Lorrales
says...
6:49pm Thu 17 Nov 11
Ashles wrote:Accepting life saving medications and proceedures when you're in a critical state is not the same and should not be compared to giving vaccines to otherwise well people. You can not know the vaccine will not harm you (adverse reactions exist, vaccine manufacturers list them) or that it will be of benefit to you; you may never be at risk from the illness you are inocculated with and even when inocculated you can still catch it.
"Despite the false belief systems of many people who know not when they are being manipulated, it is a very responsible parent who refuses to inject their child with poisons." Anaesthetics are poisonous - presumably if your child needs surgery you will forbid them to have anaesthesia? Would that be what a 'responsible parent' would do? It's really embarassing when people talk nonsense like this - some substances which are 'poisonous' or harmful in some doses can still save your life.
beaucarrel
says...
7:09pm Thu 17 Nov 11
com
I have also just written a new book titled M.M.R this covers all childhood infectious diseases.
It is wise to consider all options, not just the ones which can and do cause severe suffering worse than the actual disease.
It is most irresponsible not to study all available information about vaccination, not doing so could give your child autism.
CassiS
says...
7:10pm Thu 17 Nov 11
"Vaccines are neither safe nor effective, but most of all, quite unnecessary. Infectious diseases of childhood are beneficial for children. They prime and mature the immune system of children and represent developmental milestones. Who with of a sound mind would try, no matter how unsuccessfully, to prevent children from developing normal immunological responses and reach developmental milestones?"
Dr. Viera Scheibner, Research Scientist, GVAL Advisory Board Chairwoman
I think you will find, if you research and are presented with the truth, that those children who suffer after contracting childhood diseases are reacting that way because their immune systems are shot (through vaccination) and lots of the time they are contracting something they have theoretically been immunised against which is bizarre in itself.
You can choose to become informed or just believe the propaganda - up to you, but for the sake of future generations please choose the former.
CassiS
says...
7:18pm Thu 17 Nov 11
AngelicDevil wrote:Two points here.
Perhaps a little read up on child mortality in the Victorian era and prior to that would highlight why vaccination is so important.....
The death rates dropped to practically zero once sanitation was introduced, with removal of warehouse work and introduction of a system which saw better nutrition and living conditions. Vaccinations were introduced later, but somehow someone managed to claim it as a victory for vaccinations. (In a healthy child a well managed childhood illness is a positive experience for the body. )
Secondly you can research homeopathic hospital mortality rates vs "conventional" hospital in this era. The mortality rates at the former were a fraction of those at the latter. People didn't have to die like they did, they just had to make the right healthcare choice!
CassiS
says...
7:23pm Thu 17 Nov 11
grace295 wrote:Get to a homeopath!
I had all my vaccines as a child and weeks later also had measles, g measles, at 4 y/o had mumps, and at 5 chicken pox, what was the point of injecting the toxic substances into my body. Still have baby card from clinic showing that I came down with measles 2 weeks after vaccine at around 6 months old. Hmm wonder where I got them from. At 16 I then had the yr 10 injections and within 2 weeks was in hospital with "meningitis like" infection, closely followed by my 1st asthma attack continuing into permanent rhinitis. A few years later stupidly had another vaccine (can't remember which due to the brain hasn't worked properly since) and from then on suffered 4-5 years of the most horrific migraine headaches, constant for about 2 weeks at a time with a few hours break in between. My body was set off into the most horrific of autoimmune and neurological attacks. I know what hell I have been going thru for the past 15 yrs, can't imagine a child having to go thru this and I can imagine a parents lifetime denial that they had caused this to their child, but the least they can do is not let it happen again. Look around you people, friends and family are dropping like flies with diseases that were not around before mass immunisation. I know 10 people suffering from "epileptic like seizures", some happened within 12 hrs of a vaccine, you would be just plain stupid if you called this a coincidence. A close relative proved in court that a vaccine had caused her Lupus and RA as well as other autoimmune disorders, drs agreed. We are turning into 1 very sick society, I will take childhood illnesses over vaccines anytime. When they said aluminium was found in the brains of alzheimers patients and that mercury was causing neuro conditions, they made the aluminium can manufacturers line things with plastic and everyone rushed into get the mercury out of their teeth, so WHY are we now injecting this into our children. STUPID!!!!!!
MediumRare
says...
7:45pm Thu 17 Nov 11
Lorrales wrote:Oh dear God.
Ashles wrote:It doesn't leave 'children only normal and healthy'. What is normal and healthy nowadays? Too many children suffer with allergies, asthma, autism, cancer and many other ailments. Trivialising it just makes you an ill informed comedian.
Lorrales wrote:Yes, perhaps they would have had superpowers - **** that evil MMR and it's effect of leaving children only normal and healthy.MediumRare wrote:You do not know what they would have been like without vaccination? Therefore you can not know they had 'the mmr without any side effect whatsoever'.Erwin Alber wrote: I'd much rather that my child got the childhood diseases that the MMR vaccine is supposed to (but does not) prevent, than MMR-induced autism. To me, it's a no-brainer really, especially as the rubella component of the MMR is cultured on a cell line derived from aborted human foetus tissue and the measles component on measles virus- infected eggs. The vaccine is consequently contaminated with bits of bird viruses. There is therefore just no way I would let any of these brainwashed needle nuts get near any child of mine.Oh dear oh dear. I do have children, two of them, who have both had the MMR without any side affect whatsoever. The reason there is a measles outbreak in Brighton is that it seems to attract the sort of idiotic middle class conspiracy theorist who would rather search the internet for years to find a couple of pages that support their paranoia than trust someone who has had literally years of training (in my GPs case specialised in Paediatrics). The MMR / Autism link has been disproved by every same medical thinker for literally years. You should maybe read Send in the idiots by Kamran Nazeer, an autistic himself who debunks it rather nicely.
So now cancer and asthma are linked to BEING vaccinated? Even your most tripped out hippy website is going to have trouble hosting something that proves that.
The illnesses have always affected children. I doubt you can prove beyond speculation that the rates have increased but if they have one of the reasons will be that kids develop them later in life and were previously dying as infants as they weren't vaccinated.
And as for "new" diseases well the things that cause them are constantly evolving just like we are and therefore new mutations and diseases occur all the time. AIDS for example.
stewgreen
says...
7:54pm Thu 17 Nov 11
- So if they choose No , they should agree to pay into the compensation fund for babies who are too young to be vaccinated, but die or are harmed by these preventable diseases after they catch it from unvaccinated children.
- A count of the dead children for the U.S.A. is at the JENNY MCCARTHY BODY COUNT
keepinformed
says...
8:05pm Thu 17 Nov 11
And there are massive payouts in the USA for vaccine damage, too!
MediumRare
says...
8:42pm Thu 17 Nov 11
In the US you can also get a massive payout because you burned yourself on a hot beverage you ordered. Any payouts in the UK?
keepinformed
says...
10:08pm Thu 17 Nov 11
The massive payouts are from Big Pharma and health authorities, for serious vaccine damage, not for trivial stuff. And you call me uninformed!
naturalhealth
says...
10:55pm Thu 17 Nov 11
naturalhealth
says...
10:56pm Thu 17 Nov 11
Informedperson
says...
12:20am Fri 18 Nov 11
Pro-vaxxers, please tell me if you've ever read a vaccine insert, thanks.
Informedperson
says...
12:29am Fri 18 Nov 11
grace295 wrote:Have people even read this quote? How can you read, take this information in and STILL think vaccines work and are harmless?
I had all my vaccines as a child and weeks later also had measles, g measles, at 4 y/o had mumps, and at 5 chicken pox, what was the point of injecting the toxic substances into my body. Still have baby card from clinic showing that I came down with measles 2 weeks after vaccine at around 6 months old. Hmm wonder where I got them from. At 16 I then had the yr 10 injections and within 2 weeks was in hospital with "meningitis like" infection, closely followed by my 1st asthma attack continuing into permanent rhinitis.
A few years later stupidly had another vaccine (can't remember which due to the brain hasn't worked properly since) and from then on suffered 4-5 years of the most horrific migraine headaches, constant for about 2 weeks at a time with a few hours break in between. My body was set off into the most horrific of autoimmune and neurological attacks. I know what hell I have been going thru for the past 15 yrs, can't imagine a child having to go thru this and I can imagine a parents lifetime denial that they had caused this to their child, but the least they can do is not let it happen again.
Look around you people, friends and family are dropping like flies with diseases that were not around before mass immunisation. I know 10 people suffering from "epileptic like seizures", some happened within 12 hrs of a vaccine, you would be just plain stupid if you called this a coincidence. A close relative proved in court that a vaccine had caused her Lupus and RA as well as other autoimmune disorders, drs agreed. We are turning into 1 very sick society, I will take childhood illnesses over vaccines anytime.
When they said aluminium was found in the brains of alzheimers patients and that mercury was causing neuro conditions, they made the aluminium can manufacturers line things with plastic and everyone rushed into get the mercury out of their teeth, so WHY are we now injecting this into our children. STUPID!!!!!!
I rest my case.
MediumRare
says...
6:01am Fri 18 Nov 11
keepinformed wrote:That's a "no" to any UK cases isn't it?
By resorting to ridicule you show your argument is weak. This is simply playground bullying and shows you up for what you are.
The massive payouts are from Big Pharma and health authorities, for serious vaccine damage, not for trivial stuff. And you call me uninformed!
MediumRare
says...
6:12am Fri 18 Nov 11
You rest your case? She admitted her brain doesn't work properly. I'm not sure that would stand up in court.
beaucarrel
says...
9:04am Fri 18 Nov 11
Who is it who is stopping this from happening and depriving children of alternative effective treatment.
Doctors have no answer to viral conditions and are reliant upon a greedy merciless group of pharmaceutical companies who want to make vaccinations compulsary to ensure their continued massive profits.
Could these people fear the implementation of Homoeopathy in main straem medicine?
I Know they do!!!!
Ashles
says...
9:16am Fri 18 Nov 11
Lorrales wrote:Apparently you have never heard of smallpox or many other dreadful diseases which we are all much less likely to contract today precisely because of vaccination. It's incredible how people can grow up ignoant of the medical advances that allows them to live far longwer and more helathy lives than any point in human history - and then scaremonger abut the very processes and developments that allow them to do so.
Ashles wrote: "Despite the false belief systems of many people who know not when they are being manipulated, it is a very responsible parent who refuses to inject their child with poisons." Anaesthetics are poisonous - presumably if your child needs surgery you will forbid them to have anaesthesia? Would that be what a 'responsible parent' would do? It's really embarassing when people talk nonsense like this - some substances which are 'poisonous' or harmful in some doses can still save your life.Accepting life saving medications and proceedures when you're in a critical state is not the same and should not be compared to giving vaccines to otherwise well people. You can not know the vaccine will not harm you (adverse reactions exist, vaccine manufacturers list them) or that it will be of benefit to you; you may never be at risk from the illness you are inocculated with and even when inocculated you can still catch it.
Anyone who does not get the correct vaccinations before visiting certain countries would be really quite stupid. Of course it's their choice but then it's also people's choice not to look before criossing the road.
Ashles
says...
9:21am Fri 18 Nov 11
beaucarrel wrote:If anyone actually studied this then they would no there is no link between MMR and autism. This has been discredited as thoroughly as anything can be.
www.homoeopathicflu. com I have also just written a new book titled M.M.R this covers all childhood infectious diseases. It is wise to consider all options, not just the ones which can and do cause severe suffering worse than the actual disease. It is most irresponsible not to study all available information about vaccination, not doing so could give your child autism.
But of course drumming up fear of real medicine is a wonderful revenue generator for homoeopathy and anything 'alternative'.
Ashles
says...
9:30am Fri 18 Nov 11
naturalhealth wrote:Parents just 'know better'? This is the kind of ignorant nonsense that actually causes severe health risks. The jury is not 'out' on vaccination - it is without doubt effective.
Figures show that most of the children contracting measles has already been vaccinated - it does not confer immunity, it causes problems, as sadly many parents are beginning to realise, and the scientific community (supported by the black out created by the media), are locked into this narrow minded argument that vaccines are the answer. Thank goodness parents know better. The jury on vaccinations is still out; lets do more research, before we have yet more casualties. The very few children who have died from the complications of measles, sadly were kids from underprivileged social backgrounds, with poor nutrition and unloved.
Do you actually understand what vacvcination is and why it is effective?
It doesn't seem so.
Ashles
says...
9:44am Fri 18 Nov 11
beaucarrel wrote:"The burning question is; Why do they not train Doctors and nurses in Homoeopathy,"
The burning question is; Why do they not train Doctors and nurses in Homoeopathy, this form of treatment has been shown to be totaly safe with no side effects and works well with infectious childhood diseases. Who is it who is stopping this from happening and depriving children of alternative effective treatment. Doctors have no answer to viral conditions and are reliant upon a greedy merciless group of pharmaceutical companies who want to make vaccinations compulsary to ensure their continued massive profits. Could these people fear the implementation of Homoeopathy in main straem medicine? I Know they do!!!!
Because it doesn't actually do anything. it is water.
" this form of treatment has been shown to be totaly safe with no side effects"
Yes. It is just water.
"and works well with infectious childhood diseases."
Please provide links to studies where this has been demonstrated and replicated.
And once again would these be childhood diseases that... naturally go away all by themselves?
"Doctors have no answer to viral conditions and are reliant upon a greedy merciless group of pharmaceutical companies who want to make vaccinations compulsary to ensure their continued massive profits."
Sigh, the tedious 'Big Pharma' conspiracy again. Would it not make sense that the 'greedy, ruthless pharmaceutical companies' will actually make the most money from medicine which is actually effective?
By your own rationale, if homoeopathy actually worked they would be first to jump on the bandwagon and milk it for every penny it was worth. Why would SmithKline Beecham not just invest in a huge homoeopathy division if it's so effective and there's momney to be made? The 'conspiracy' makes no sense.
The reason they don't is that they are regulated to not make false claims about efficacy (which homoeopathy sadly is not) so they cannot market something known and repeatedly demonstrated to be ineffective.
"Could these people fear the implementation of Homoeopathy in main straem medicine?"
Why would they? They would just sell it themselves. If the slightest evidence for it's efficacy could be found, the pharmaceutical companies would be all over it. It would revolutionise medicine becuase it would be working in a way that would be entirely new to science (we haven't even touched on the claims homoepathy makes which contradict known science in at least thre ways). It would open an extraordinary field of research and the potential profit would be colossal!
Yet the greedy big Pharma companies choose to ignore this amazing new revenue stream because... ?
" I Know they do!!!! "
Of course you do. It's amazing how much people can know about science without having studied it.
keepinformed
says...
10:06am Fri 18 Nov 11
Remember the predictions of a big flu pandemic (predictions based on what?); HMG spent millions of pounds of taxpayers' money on vaccines, huge numbers of units of which weren't even used. But, hey, the manufacturer was quids in! And there wasn't even an epidemic. That was swine flu. Same thing with bird flu.
Pro-vaccination people on here accuse those who aren't in favour of scaremongering: it's the manufacturers who do that, and it happens again and again and the authorities never question why these predicted outbreaks don't occur, but dutifully fork out your money and mine. Hundreds die of seasonal flu in the UK every year, but the three dozen who died of swine flu made the headlines.
keepinformed
says...
10:28am Fri 18 Nov 11
Ashles actually thinks that Big Pharma would manufacture homoeopathic remedies if a) they thought it effective and b) "if homoeopathy actually worked they would be first to jump on the bandwagon and milk it for every penny it was worth."
Ashles is so right on the money motivation because Big Pharma is very aware that homoeopathic remedies are too cheap for them to be bothered with them. Gold and platinum remedies cost the same as daisy and bee venom. Can one fairly conclude, then, that they are opposed to homoeopathy in the final analysis because they can't make money out of it in the same way they can out of conventional drugs?
MediumRare
says...
10:37am Fri 18 Nov 11
keepinformed wrote:Name it. Include how it proved MMR and autism are linked and that vaccination doesn't work. Links please.
Medium Rare: there was a recent, highprofile UK case, as I'm sure you know. This is a breakthrough because how do parents find the money to go up against the vested interests of government-sponsored vaccine manufacturers?
Remember the predictions of a big flu pandemic (predictions based on what?); HMG spent millions of pounds of taxpayers' money on vaccines, huge numbers of units of which weren't even used. But, hey, the manufacturer was quids in! And there wasn't even an epidemic. That was swine flu. Same thing with bird flu.
Pro-vaccination people on here accuse those who aren't in favour of scaremongering: it's the manufacturers who do that, and it happens again and again and the authorities never question why these predicted outbreaks don't occur, but dutifully fork out your money and mine. Hundreds die of seasonal flu in the UK every year, but the three dozen who died of swine flu made the headlines.
Ashles
says...
10:52am Fri 18 Nov 11
Well that's the association of homoeopathic practitioners so hardly unbiased.
"or for independent reports from the Department of Health go to http://www.dhsspsni.
gov.uk/index/hss/com
plementary-alternati
ve-medicine.htm"
Okay so that's a link to a single study in which 12 Irish GPs are asked their opinion (opinion mind you, not a blinded trial to be seen anywhere) on a range of alternative remedies.
I don't really see how that is hugely relevant bearing in mind the actual evidence we have that homoeopathy is inefective.
The problem is the NHS takes the easy way out with homoeopathy as it knows it is a cheap alternative when patients want something different (and of course it won't actually have any harmful effect as it's just water).
A government report actually highlights this and is quite shocking:
"In order for the public to make informed choices, it is therefore vitally important that the scientific evidence base for homeopathy is clearly explained and available. He will therefore engage further with the Department of Health to ensure communication to the public is addressed. His position remains that the evidence of efficacy and the scientific basis of homeopathy is highly questionable."
But it then says:
"The Government Chief Scientific Adviser has discussed the Department of Health policy on homeopathy with lead officials, and understands the reasons for the policy decision. However, he still has concerns about how this policy is communicated to the public. There naturally will be an assumption that if the NHS is offering homeopathic treatments then they will be efficacious, whereas the overriding reason for NHS provision is that homeopathy is available to provide patient choice."
So the official policy of the department of health is that "the scientific basis of homeopathy is highly questionable" but that's irrelevant because it's all about choice.
So in reality it's quite the opposite of the perceived conspiracy keeping Homoeopathy down - Homoeopathy is permitted in the NHS DESPITE the fact they don't think it has any actual effect.
Another paragraph:
"As set out in his oral evidence to the Committee (Q176), Professor Harper, Chief Scientist at the Department, is of the view that the majority of independent scientists consider the evidence for the efficacy of homeopathy to be weak or absent, and that there is currently no plausible scientific mechanism for homeopathy."
So I really wouldn't point to the Department of Health as a body who believes in the efficacy of Homoeopathy - they really dont. It's just easier to let people have choice, even when they don't really know what they're choosing.
The report:
http://www.dh.gov.uk
/prod_consum_dh/grou
ps/dh_digitalassets/
@dh/@en/@ps/document
s/digitalasset/dh_11
7811.pdf
What is more interesting that Homoeopathy puts across far more misinformation, cherry picking of data, and outright incorrect information than Big Pharma ever has.
A review of studies on Homoeopathy.
http://www.acsh.org/
healthissues/newsID.
632/healthissue_deta
il.asp
Ashles
says...
11:15am Fri 18 Nov 11
"Ashles is so right on the money motivation because Big Pharma is very aware that homoeopathic remedies are too cheap for them to be bothered with them. Gold and platinum remedies cost the same as daisy and bee venom. Can one fairly conclude, then, that they are opposed to homoeopathy in the final analysis because they can't make money out of it in the same way they can out of conventional drugs?"
No one can't because that would be a ridiculous 'conclusion'.
They would be able to sell small bottles of water for a huge profit. It certainly works for Ernst Louis Ambrecht who made £4.5m in 2008 alone from selling Homoeopathic remdies. Interestingly that puts his company profits ABOVE the largest independent maker of medicines in the country, Thornton and Ross, in the same year.
So it's a little naive to believe there isn't a lot of money to be made in homoeopathy by those actually making the remedy.
Link: http://www.telegraph
.co.uk/finance/newsb
ysector/pharmaceutic
alsandchemicals/2795
156/Britains-biggest
-private-companies-C
hemical-elements-of-
success.html
"Secondly, homoeopaths' patients are rarely gullible: they are usually well-informed and come to a homoeopath because orthodox medicine has not got them better. Those who turn to homoeopathy as a first choice nearly always do so because they have taken responsibility for their health and have read up carefully."
I actually worked in a shop selling homoeopathic remdies - it was amazing how many of those who bought them did not understand what homoeopathy itself claimed or what they were buying. Most people seem to think they are buying something containing some sort of herbal extract. They didn't realise it literally contained nothing except for water (odds are that occasionally there might be a molecule or two of actual ingredient, but almost certainly not in anything above 30x).
They also seem to think the higher dilution values mean the remedy is stronger, not that it is actually far MORE DILUTE.
For example, imagine dropping one thrid of a drop of active ingredient into all the water on the planet. If you then scooped up a bottle of water randmly from somewhere else on the planet that would be roughly equivalent to the strength of a 13C remedy - ie certain to contain nothing but water.
If you then took a drop from this bottle and diluted it by 100 times (ie drop it into the equivalent of 99 drops of water) so you have made it 100 times more dilurte again, you have just made a 14C dilution. Yet homoeopaths claim this solution is now even 'stronger' (and bear in mind homoeopathic solutions go up to 200C which would be like filling the entire universe with water and hiding a single molecule of active ingredient somewhere in it).
So there is no debate that what is being sold is always a bottle of pure water.
naturalhealth
says...
12:06pm Fri 18 Nov 11
keepinformed
says...
1:03pm Fri 18 Nov 11
The remedies do not, in fact, work at all if they are prepared with dilution alone, as was discovered by Hahnemann (a doctor and pharmacist) who founded the therapy. After every dilution, succussion is performed and this is what activates them. Any book on homoeopathy will tell you that and Ashles must surely know this as he or she has sold the flipping things! Or else Ashles chooses not to make this fact known in order to ridicule homoeopathy.
You really cannot equate a casual buyer of remedies over the counter with an informed patient, which is what homoeopaths encounter. Any who turn up and know nothing are educated as part of the consultation, so they can make informed choices.
roofspace
says...
1:22pm Fri 18 Nov 11
MediumRare
says...
2:00pm Fri 18 Nov 11
*tumbleweed*
keepinformed
says...
2:57pm Fri 18 Nov 11
But, to point you on your way, type in BBC News Compensation MMR and you'll get things like, "The mother of a Cheshire teenager who was left severely brain damaged by the MMR vaccine has won a compensation award from the government" (£90,000). There's a mention of three dead children following MMR in Japan, with $160,000 paid in compensation to each family.
These alone show that parents who choose not to have their children vaccinated cannot willy-nilly be accused of negligence or stupidity, which is what has happened on this thread repeatedly.
For the record, we had our children vaccinated as we had no medical knowledge at the time and trusted that doctors knew best. I therefore don't blame parents, either, who go that route.
Please accept that every responsible parent tries to do the best for his or her children, to protect them. If they feel on balance to vaccinate, that's their choice, and they feel it offers the best protection. If they choose not to vaccinate because they feel the risk of vaccination injury outweighs the risk of the natural illness (and on this page we're talking about measles, which is not a threat in the overwhelming majority of cases), then their choice, too, deserves equal respect.
Informedperson
says...
3:01pm Fri 18 Nov 11
fety.edu/package_ins
erts.htm
http://www.vaccinati
oncouncil.org/2011/1
1/17/smoke-mirrors-a
nd-the-disappearance
-of-polio/
http://www.whale.to/
m/gunn.html
You can do the work now, on the package inserts it clearly states that vaccines have not been tested to see if they cause cancer and also to see whether fertility is affected.
There's a clear list of reactions too.
Have a nice day.
lisaleesussex
says...
4:18pm Fri 18 Nov 11
Great mums who bother to research the subject before vaccinating our children knows that the MMR jab does not give lifelong immunity it just gives a temporary immunity and leaves one vulnerable to contract the disease at a later stage in life. This is where the complications occur. Measles is a childhood disease and should be treated as such. It's not just autism that vaccines are linked with... try reading the inserts the vaccines come with. Surely anyone who questions why great mums choose not to vaccinate would have done this simple task before injecting their own children with the MMR then condemning those who choose not to. We do care very much about our children which is why we have chosen not to inject them with a substance which could in itself be more damaging than the diseases they are 'supposed' to protect against.
I became type 1 diabetic 3 years ago, an adverse reaction to a vaccine. I now inject myself with insulin on a daily basis as a result so, I speak from experience. Vaccines are not as safe as medics would have us believe. You have no idea what an over-stimulated immune system is capable of doing and what part of the body it might attack, treating it as though it were foreign matter.
I also ask you to contemplate this; Scarlet fever used to cause hundreds of thousands of deaths each year, just like polio and many other diseases. It's casualty rate declined alongside and at the same rate of other infectious diseases from the 1800's onwards. Today, scarlet fever does not cause any deaths and guess what, there never has been a vaccine for it! So, how can a deadly disease be erradicated whithout one of the pharma's life saving magical jabs? I'll leave you to do your own futher research....
MediumRare
says...
4:38pm Fri 18 Nov 11
It is the only case I know of in the UK and it is a government payout rather than one by "big pharma". On balance it was agreed there was a side effect in this one specific case.
When you go for MMR jabs your GP will tell you that there is a risk of side effects and they will keep you in the surgery after in case of allergic reaction. It's not entirely risk free but it is much less risky than measles or polio.
keepinformed
says...
5:00pm Fri 18 Nov 11
All the hoo-hah locally over a few cases, and how many of those who've gone down with it were damaged or killed? For that matter, how many had already been jabbed?
My advice is to read up all you can, look at both sides, and decide what you think is in the best interests of your child. And do listen to responsible people like Lisaleesussex who made informed choices. Whatever you decide, you should not condemn parents who decide the other way: they, too, are trying to do their best for their children.
I note that MediumRare has graciously acknowledged there was a side-effect fairly resulting in a big payout, and that vaccination is "not entirely risk free". Given that information (and do read the vaccine leaflets telling you of possible side effects) and reading up on what exactly your child is risking if he or she catches the disease, make up your own mind in the best interests of your child - not of homoeopathy, Big Pharma or HMG (as the Blairs did over Leo and purportedly took him abroad for the single jabs: if true, such a good example while HMG were telling everyone to go for the MMR).
Almighty Sky Pixie
says...
5:40pm Fri 18 Nov 11
Succussion was an after-thought because it all just became a bit too embarassing - and homeopaths became worried that anyone could sell water and a few well-chosen lines of reassuring cattle-dung.
Placebo effects are proven and scientifically verifiable - homeopathy hijacks the placebo effect for profit.
The only nice thing about homeopathy is that, unlike medicines, it doesn't matter at all if one makes a mistake when dispensing anything homepathic - it can be safely dispensed by monkeys.
Vaccinate for MMR - it saves many lives. Ridicule those that choose not to - it's not only their children that suffer disproportionally - it's other innocent children.
Don't listen to morons and only 'weigh up' the evidence if you have a medical degree.
Lorrales
says...
5:55pm Fri 18 Nov 11
roofspace wrote:No doubt if your vaccinated child suffered a vaccine reaction you would expect understanding, sympathy and possibly even compensation. We each make the best choice we can for our children, one which we feel is right but every 'right' decision has the potential to go wrong! What would be your position if an unvaccinated child caught measles from your recently vaccinated child. MMR is live and one of the side effects is vaccine induced measles. Intelligent, responsible parents research the disease in question, the vaccine ingredients and the possible side effects, they don't just blindly do what's expected; they arm themselves with enough information so that they can make an educated choice.
I hope that the parent of any child not vaccinated who contracts measels and suffers serious consequences or death does not expect any understanding or sympathy for themselves, only their poor children who deserved more intelligent parents.
Lorrales
says...
6:19pm Fri 18 Nov 11
Almighty Sky Pixie wrote:So you know something the rest of us don't....that the outbreak of measles was in the unvaccinated, started by an unvaccinated child....the newspaper report doesn't say. What innocent children do you refer to...those too young to be vaccinated who can catch measles from a vaccinated or unvaccinated child, vaccinated children who can never undo what's done to them or unvaccinated children who would be forcibly vaccinated by people who don't believe in freedom of choice? By the way my children don't suffer disproportionally - I would say they enjoy better health than their vaccinated cousins and friends.
Anyone who believes in homeopathy is sadly misguided. It is a moronic irrational belief. I was subjected to lectures in homeopathy - I asked the pseudoscientist giving the lectures that, as greater dilutions increased potency, what on earth were the bottles washed with? Clean water would have been so ultra potent. My question got a good laugh, as intended. Succussion was an after-thought because it all just became a bit too embarassing - and homeopaths became worried that anyone could sell water and a few well-chosen lines of reassuring cattle-dung. Placebo effects are proven and scientifically verifiable - homeopathy hijacks the placebo effect for profit. The only nice thing about homeopathy is that, unlike medicines, it doesn't matter at all if one makes a mistake when dispensing anything homepathic - it can be safely dispensed by monkeys. Vaccinate for MMR - it saves many lives. Ridicule those that choose not to - it's not only their children that suffer disproportionally - it's other innocent children. Don't listen to morons and only 'weigh up' the evidence if you have a medical degree.
MediumRare
says...
6:28pm Fri 18 Nov 11
MediumRare
says...
6:52pm Fri 18 Nov 11
Lorrales
says...
6:54pm Fri 18 Nov 11
MediumRare wrote:Actually my doctor didn't know the vaccine ingredients or the side effects so I borrowed his little green book (vaccine bible for doctors, updated yearly) his was 4 years out of date so I bought my own copy and asked to be refered to a pediatrician. As for the MMR causing autism I don't think the findings in an American court can be ignored....also the reason for the UK government paying out for vaccine damage is because it made vaccine manufactures exempt from liability...
It's not gracious. Any GP will tell you the precise side effect risk of any innoculation I wanted you to link to that case because the full judgement states that it is isolated, that MMR is safe and that MMR does not cause autism.
MediumRare
says...
7:17pm Fri 18 Nov 11
Informedperson
says...
11:51pm Fri 18 Nov 11
EMASON
says...
1:06am Sat 19 Nov 11
MediumRare
says...
6:58am Sat 19 Nov 11
keepinformed
says...
11:17am Sat 19 Nov 11
I must correct Almighty Sky Pixie for his/her stated views on how homoeopathic remedies are prepared. (Noting first his relish of mockery - more bullying and belittling, showing a streak of nastiness in a lecture). Hahnemann, the founder, noting horrible side-effects of drugs, hypothesized that the doses were too high. Logic led him to try and establish the smallest amount of, say, mercury, that could be administered to a patient and still be curative.
There we have dilution. Mercury, however, doesn't dissolve and so he had to grind in with the inert carrier (water) until it would mix. To ensure it mixed well, it is thought he succussed it (banged the glass vial on a leather pad) several times. When he administered the diluted and succussed drug to a patient, he found the curative response was greater than dilution alone, but the side-effects were, of course, smaller.
That led him to experiment with other substances, and the results were replicated. He experimented further, wondering how far he could go with dilution and succussion to produce curative results without side-effects.
There is nothing fanciful or unscientific in Hahnemann's approach. The Pixie's laugh about "clean water being ultra potent" is because he was unaware of the above history.
It is, of course, unknown precisely the mechanism by which remedies prepared by dilution and succussion work. In higher dilutions, it cannot be by chemical reaction of the drug on the body. The different factor is succussion and without it the substance is not curative. This leaves the possibility of physics.
If homoeopathy's detractors on here can find a similar "therapy" that uses high dilution alone without succussion to produce remedies, I would join with them in expressing my doubts that such a procedure could result in a product containing anything but water. That, as I have shown, is what the detractors are ridiculing, but it is not how a homoeopathic remedy is prepared, so they're laughing their legs off at the wrong thing.
keepinformed
says...
11:25am Sat 19 Nov 11
keepinformed
says...
11:25am Sat 19 Nov 11
Almighty Sky Pixie
says...
11:43am Sat 19 Nov 11
Homeopathy appears to employ a few tried-and-tested advanced 'hand-holding' techniques sometimes used by out-of-touch health workers who have got hopelessly out-of-date with conventional medicine and rely on the fact that most of their patients don't die or complain immediately after leaving their consultation as evidence of their magical healing powers. Homeopathy deprives patients and the NHS of money. It can be used by any imbecile wishing to enhance the simpler 'tea-and-sympathy' approach to those people with conditions that will either cure themselves or the excessively anxious worried-well. As noted earlier, homeopathy hides behind and utilises an established and verifiable placebo effect. It is no different to faith-healing - some truly want to believe they're cured by it and so the magic must have been powerful.
Whilst free speech is essential it should be removed from those who do not (or perhaps cannot) exercise some responsible, adult, reasoning. Vaccination has, without doubt, provided such enormous benefits to humankind - ignorant comments might just tip the balance against vaccination in someone gullible enough to believe fiction or anecdotes rather than robust evidence. To defend themselves some say 'well, it's my opinion'. Fine, but this to me, is just like an ignoramus using the 'entitled to my opinion' argument to encourage someone to fix their own gas boiler or play around with the brakes on their car after ignoring their mechanic's advice. This isn't to say there have not been problems - the re-use of contaminated needles in vaccination programmes was and is an absolute disaster. It may well have been central to the spread of AIDS. The harvesting of blood-products in China has left so many AIDS orphans. The operation of pricing cartels by pharmaceutical companies has been detected in some cases and the suppression of negative research findings was deplorable. The use of the cheaper HPV vaccine was a very poor decision that this government should rectify.
However, some idiots seem to be suggesting that not vaccinating will save lives and reduce suffering. These same idiots appear to have ignored very valid points about the all-important 'herd immunity' which is being eroded by ignorance and over-indulged bliss-ninnies. Try reading about 'Rose's Paradox' or the Prevention Paradox (Geofrey Rose) about why it's hard for some to understand the benefits of vaccination.
If only it were those that continue to make stupid choices that alone suffered the consequences then that, for me, would be fine. It would certainly put natural selection back in the right direction and even the gene-pool needs a little chlorine now and then.
Dr Andrew Wakefield's research was fraudulent - avail yourselves of the facts plus a few new ones through publications like the British Medical Journal and not from conspiracy comics. It was a deeply shameful episode for research publication - the medical community were hoodwinked by Wakefield. He made a lot of money out of it.
In summary, only fix your boiler or wire your house if you are suitably qualified. Speak to your doctor if you have any health concerns. If your doctor is fairly useless (quite possible) then change to another one. If someone is giving their opinion about potentially serious medical matters and they also believe that water (that has been shaken the correct way in a bottle) will cure you of an ailment then smile at them and ask yourself if they might be bonkers.
Elroyo
says...
1:54pm Sat 19 Nov 11
It was truly awful.
Anyone who thinks their parents may have been irresponsible/mental
ly ill/etc enough to not have you vaccinated, please go to your doctor and get it done.
I seriously doubt anyone who has actually had measles as an adult would advise otherwise.
contentedmummy
says...
2:00pm Sat 19 Nov 11
Jenny Allan wrote:Great comment. Unlike the usual cheeky crowd on here. It's a real tough one, I don't like the idea that measles is on the increase due to lack of vaccination but it's a parents right to choose & we need to adapt to these alternatives. I admire parents who stick to their principles. We are fair game in the media, parents are either victims or culprits.
Measles is highly infectious and can be nasty, but parents understandably still have concerns about the MMR vaccine, which contains three live viruses.
I am quite sure that more parents would be prepared to vaccinate their children if they were given the choice of single measles vaccinations. These were part of the UK vaccination programme, prior to the introduction of the MMR vaccine in 1988. The first MMR vaccine, Pluserix, which contained the Urabe mumps component, was previously banned in Canada and withdrawn in the UK in 2002 after causing untold adverse reactions. Robert Fletcher, who was profoundly disabled by the MMR vaccine, was finally compensated by the UK government 18 years after receiving the MMR vaccine.
Don't blame parents for their worries. Give them a proven safe CHOICE of vaccine for their children.
keepinformed
says...
2:30pm Sat 19 Nov 11
"Whilst free speech is essential it should be removed from those who do not (or perhaps cannot) exercise some responsible, adult, reasoning."
I suppose Pixie would be in the forefront of those deciding who met his/her nauseatingly totalitarian criteria. What Pixie's saying is, you're free to speak your mind as long as I've agreed first that you're uttering opinions of which I approve.
In the light of that, why should any of us take the slightest notice of Pixie?
One point I will take up: there is every point in bringing homoeopathy into the vaccination debate. Anyone who wants to look at alternatives to vaccination has the option (thank God and everyone who fought to destroy Nazism) of going to a homoeopath and discussing what can be provided.
All those of us who've suggested this want is that concerned parents make an informed choice. Millions find this therapy effective. But we would all defend the absolute right of a parent to choose vaccination. Pixie and supporters want to deny you any alternative and even to have those alternatives suppressed because they are sold out to conventional medicine.
All of them have ignored the fact that a registered homoeopath has had years of rigorous training - they haven't dabbled in a book for an hour or two one weekend! No, Pixie has to bully and belittle over and over, equating them with unqualified boiler fixers.
Ask yourselves: which contributors have been courteous and respectful and upheld the freedom of parents to inform themselves before making a choice? Not MediumRare, Pixie or others, who have been rude, aggressive and advocates of medical fascism.
MediumRare
says...
2:46pm Sat 19 Nov 11
You are a selfish misguided snake oil salesman and you need to be debunked for the good of childrens health.
keepinformed
says...
3:00pm Sat 19 Nov 11
MediumRare
says...
3:13pm Sat 19 Nov 11
That way even if you find me the rudest man on the planet you'll still get the full, verified, independant information regarding vaccination.
keepinformed
says...
3:31pm Sat 19 Nov 11
I am astonished you find me so dangerous you have to warn people off in such strong terms. I've certainly advocated checking out homoeopathy for those who are interested in possible alternatives. I have also repeatedly supported those who, on balance, choose vaccination. I'm supporting freedom of choice whilst you label me selfish and misguided. Why selfish? I can see you think I'm misguided, which you're clearly entitled to do (and have consistently, if discourteously, done). I am not in paid employment, so I've no pecuniary interest. Snake oil - what a lovely term! Actually, a number of snake venoms are used in homoeopathy, but not their oil, as far as I know.
I have for many years used homoeopathy and seen its power in myself and my wife and children. My eldest son suffering from such serious asthma he was on daily steroids got better in months under homoeopathic treatment.
You can hear this over and over from those who choose homoeopathy, and
you're free to dismiss it as "anecdotal". What's inescapable is
that, in the face of healthcare that is free of charge at the point of delivery, people still choose to pay a homoeopath, they come back, and they recommend this therapy to their friends and family. Why would they do this if it didn't do them some good and they didn't feel conventional treatment was better as well as free?
keepinformed
says...
3:31pm Sat 19 Nov 11
I am astonished you find me so dangerous you have to warn people off in such strong terms. I've certainly advocated checking out homoeopathy for those who are interested in possible alternatives. I have also repeatedly supported those who, on balance, choose vaccination. I'm supporting freedom of choice whilst you label me selfish and misguided. Why selfish? I can see you think I'm misguided, which you're clearly entitled to do (and have consistently, if discourteously, done). I am not in paid employment, so I've no pecuniary interest. Snake oil - what a lovely term! Actually, a number of snake venoms are used in homoeopathy, but not their oil, as far as I know.
I have for many years used homoeopathy and seen its power in myself and my wife and children. My eldest son suffering from such serious asthma he was on daily steroids got better in months under homoeopathic treatment.
You can hear this over and over from those who choose homoeopathy, and
you're free to dismiss it as "anecdotal". What's inescapable is
that, in the face of healthcare that is free of charge at the point of delivery, people still choose to pay a homoeopath, they come back, and they recommend this therapy to their friends and family. Why would they do this if it didn't do them some good and they didn't feel conventional treatment was better as well as free?
Informedperson
says...
3:36pm Sat 19 Nov 11
I don't know how many times l've said this but it's fairly easy to understand - my daughter caught measles from a VACCINATED boy, he'd HAD the MMR jab.
Informedperson
says...
3:36pm Sat 19 Nov 11
I don't know how many times l've said this but it's fairly easy to understand - my daughter caught measles from a VACCINATED boy, he'd HAD the MMR jab.
Informedperson
says...
3:37pm Sat 19 Nov 11
I don't know how many times l've said this but it's fairly easy to understand - my daughter caught measles from a VACCINATED boy, he'd HAD the MMR jab.
Informedperson
says...
3:40pm Sat 19 Nov 11
Informedperson
says...
3:41pm Sat 19 Nov 11
Almighty Sky Pixie
says...
4:01pm Sat 19 Nov 11
Those using the 'it's the parents ultimate right to decide' argument choose to conveniently ignore other parents using the very same argument to force their daughters into female circumcision. Thankfully, the UK has recently rejected the right of parents to mutilate their female offsprings genitals but, very sadly, I understand that some children are still being taken abroad for the 'operation' when the parent believes the time is right.
Glad if it stimulates some thought. What do people think about updating the warning on medicines about "Keep medicines out of the reach of children" to "Keep medicines (and small bottles of water that have been shaken) out of the reach of children". Oh, hang on, there might be no need - babies drink water all the time (both the shaken and stirred type).
There was an interesting article and undercover report about a muppet supposedly advocating shaken-water for malaria prophylaxis. Check out the Royal Pharmaceutical Society's website for further info.
Anyone still unsure about homeopathy might find it useful to look up "the memory of water" and similar clap-trap being debunked.
For balance, if possible, there is arguably one benefit from homeopathy - suicidal patients who take their whole supply won't need a new liver because of it. I would ban paracetamol if I could. But don't confuse homepathy with herbalism! There are lots of plants that will kill you - unless of course, they are diluted into solutions with more water than there is on the planet.
MediumRare
says...
6:02pm Sat 19 Nov 11
Informedperson wrote:Again the bit about GPs is nonsense. Any GPshpuld be able to talk through the benefits of vaccination. If not look for another one because mine can. As to the effectiveness of vaccination it's a bit like the Monty Python what have the Romans ever done for us sketch. Well apart from eradicating or reducing smallpox, TB and polio in the Western world, preventing tetanus when you've had a deep scratch or bite......
Regarding the actual original article, l spoke to the journalist who wrote the piece and asked her if she knew anything about vaccination at all, 'no' she replied, also l asked if she knew whether the children were vaccinated or not, 'nope' again. I was asked to write an 800 word article on vaccination as l've been studying the subject for 13 years and know more than most GP's about the subject. How do l know this? Because l've spoken to GP's, my own and also been to health meetings where we have had question and answer sessions with GP's and Health Visitors. They just 'believe' it works, they have no proof, they believe it because they've been told that it works. Same as the ignorant people in the comments above stating that being unvaccinated is irresponsible, etc etc, blah blah blah.
I don't know how many times l've said this but it's fairly easy to understand - my daughter caught measles from a VACCINATED boy, he'd HAD the MMR jab.
Bill Gates recently donated 6 Billion dollars for third world vaccines to finally improve health in the developing world. I hope you're not suggesting it was a bet. Or that he should have gone out to Africa with several small bottles of water and a nice smile instead.
keepinformed
says...
8:26pm Sat 19 Nov 11
Few people in this country take anything the authorities peddle at face value any more. Laughing at people who question them just makes you look untrustworthy.
Of course it's fascist to say, "you must trust this authority or that or else you'll be punished". What else do you think it is? Another term is totalitarianism where the state always knows best: it doesn't! And, remember: the outbreaks of measles we've seen in the past have been among the vaccinated, so do you want to punish those parents for vaccinating their kids and then infecting yours?
And listen, once again: measles is rarely dangerous! If your child is healthy, he or she might be ill with measles, but you manage it correctly and he or she will recover with a strengthened immune system.
Almighty Sky Pixie
says...
9:16pm Sat 19 Nov 11
It might be fun addressing each of your points with evidence if there seemed to be even the smallest chance that you would read it.
Bottom line is that it appears to be you, keepinformed - and a handful of swivel-eyed conspiracy theorists, versus the World Health Organization and others (they save lives, you don't) - amazingly they don't hold with your last unsubstantiated sentence instead stating that "measles is a leading cause of vaccine-preventable childhood mortality". They provide references and evidence and lots of research - all very boring if you choose instead to base your beliefs on a gut feeling...and shakey shakey water.
The death rate for measles in the UK is 1 in 5000 but complications and morbidity are much higher (reference below).
In case your medical opinion in your last paragraph causes anyone to act irresponsibly - break out their homepathic emergency kit, or treat it with just chicken soup and love, then I would urge anyone concerned about measles to look at
http://www.patient.c
o.uk/doctor/Measles.
htm, speak to NHS Direct, or look on the NHS web site.
MediumRare
says...
9:37pm Sat 19 Nov 11
You do not have the right to endanger babies lives in this city with your ill informed, paranoid, conspiracy theory nonsense and I'll debunk it as long as you continue.
MediumRare
says...
9:46pm Sat 19 Nov 11
keepinformed
says...
11:01pm Sat 19 Nov 11
I shan't be returning to this thread, not even to read any more comments, because I've said all I want and I leave the good people of this city to apply their native common sense, logic and experience of life to make their choices.
Almighty Sky Pixie
says...
11:18pm Sat 19 Nov 11
This is hilarious:
http://en.wikipedia.
org/wiki/Viera_Schei
bner
Thank you, Batman, for leaving the good people of Gotham to "apply their native common sense and logic...". I can't stop laughing now.
MediumRare
says...
6:55am Sun 20 Nov 11
I'd agree with one thing mis-informed said though because if you apply your common sense and logic you'll get your child vaccinated. Rather than reading up on a quack.
Justin
says...
1:51pm Sun 20 Nov 11
Informedperson
says...
3:12pm Mon 21 Nov 11
maybeitstrue
says...
3:23pm Mon 21 Nov 11
ws.com/034208_homeop
athy_James_Randi.htm
l
Read the above article in full. You'll understand, unless you are pathologically incapable of doing so, some of the many reasons why homeopathy is attacked.
I was one of the doubters, until it cured me, and later my dog. There is a huge fear of anything that we cannot fit into little boxes.
KeefyH44
says...
4:27pm Mon 21 Nov 11
TraceyI
says...
5:09pm Mon 21 Nov 11
I also have a 5 month old who is too young to have the MMR and is currently unwell and has a suspicious rash I was alarmed that the local GP was unable to either confirm or rule out Measles,
It does anger me that I have done the right thing to protect my child yet my young baby is at risk for the increasing numbers of children affected at the school. Oh well another sleepless night of worry and temperature monitoring for us,
I do wish people would think about the vulnerable young ones they chose to put at risk.
maybeitstrue
says...
5:35pm Mon 21 Nov 11
m/gunn.html. It explains the difference between vaccinisation and immunity and how the tow do NOT equate.
Ashles
says...
12:19pm Tue 22 Nov 11
maybeitstrue wrote:The main reason why homoeopathy is 'attacked' is that in any reasonably controlled (ie double-blind) scientific test, it does not work. Nobody doubts that people BELIEVE it works. Similarly, nobody doubts that some people are absolutely convinced their team only wins when they watch them playing while wearing their lucky socks.
http://www.naturalne ws.com/034208_homeop athy_James_Randi.htm l Read the above article in full. You'll understand, unless you are pathologically incapable of doing so, some of the many reasons why homeopathy is attacked. I was one of the doubters, until it cured me, and later my dog. There is a huge fear of anything that we cannot fit into little boxes.
This is genuinely not intended to be a glib dismissal - it is extremely well documented that humans are very bad at making logical connections (or rather they are so prone to making connections that they regularly make them when no actual connection exists - this is called 'superstitious behaviour', in the strict psychological sense of the term).
People are much, much less objective than they believe.
This is why to genuinely ascertain the efficacy of any medicine (or anything where knowledge of the application could affect the perception of its efficacy) proper scientific testing must be applied.
For example - if your friend tells you that his team definitely only wins when he wears his correct team socks would you believe him? If not how would you test for this (bear in mind he is convinced this is the case)?
Also take into account he says that his socks must be put on in the exact correct way. And he has different team socks and he can never be sure which set will be the right ones for which match. You see how hard it is to test when the rules keep changing (just as homoeopathy only works when it is shaken in the exact correct way, and it won't always work, only when the exact correct 'remedy' is used for you, and in the exact correct dilution... and mainly on ailments that come and go by themselves. And even then not always. So basically you can keep giving different homoeopathic remedies for ages, and if at any point there is improvement you can thank homoeopathy.)
Plus I must address this final point about 'fear of anything we cannot fit into little boxes' which is, in different ways, so repeatedly brought up by people who do not understand the scientific method. So many, many, many discoveries in history not only did not fit into current scientific theory - they actual disagreed with it. But if evidence repeatedly shows that the universe works in a certain way then science tests this and the new information becomes part of our scientific knowledge. For example the leap to accept Quantum Mechanics was extremely hard for many physicists (who found the implications so at odds with previous models), but ultimately they could not argue with the repeated evidence.
If homoeopathy actually worked in controlled tests nobody would argue that it was real. Scientists would be really excited - it would open up whole new fields of research.
But it doesn't. Anecdotal evidence is of no use when we know that positive effects can be achieved by placebo.
maybeitstrue
says...
1:46pm Tue 22 Nov 11
.org/news/homeopathy
-effective-according
-swiss-federal-repor
t
http://apps.facebook
.com/theguardian/com
mentisfree/2007/dec/
19/comment.health
Just two for you to look at. There are hundred of studies which prove homeopathy works. In vitro experiments, a famos one carried out by the University of Edinburgh on mammary tumours in cows, etc, etc.
The latest fad in science is scientism. Look that one up too.
Ashles
says...
2:30pm Tue 22 Nov 11
I can't see the second study as it is blocked by Websense as it appears to be published on that renowned repository of scientific study - apps.facebook.com
Are those really the absolute best two studies you can point to?
A study that hasn't been published and something on facebook?
Whereas all the studies which show homoeopathy to be ineffective are in actual scientific journals and publications like The Lancet.
Ashles
says...
2:48pm Tue 22 Nov 11
Normally it is a defence when discussing things for which there is, by general agreement, no way of empirical testing, such as God.
You are on rather shaky ground invoking the term when referring to homoeopathy as it rather seems you are agreeing there actually is no evidence for homoeopathy.
maybeitstrue
says...
2:56pm Tue 22 Nov 11
The Lancet?? Are you serious? Why would a paper like that publish anything in support of homeopathy when homeopathy opposes allopathic medicine, of which The Lancet is a mouthpiece, funded partly by pharmaceutical companies. The first study is published by The Swiss federal government. Not good enough for you?
Ashles
says...
3:11pm Tue 22 Nov 11
http://www.abc.net.a
u/news/2005-08-27/ho
meopathy-ineffective
-study-finds/2090008
"But the reviewers, led by Swiss researcher Professor Matthias Egger from the University of Berne, found there was no evidence for the effectiveness of homeopathy.
They drew their conclusions after reviewing 110 homeopathy trials and an equal number of conventional medical trials. Drugs in the studies included those for respiratory infections, gut problems, musculoskeletal disorders, and for surgery."
http://www.jfponline
.com/Pages.asp?AID=1
257&UID=
"This homeopathic therapy showed no significant improvement over placebo with regard to FEV1 (0.136 L/sec active agent vs 0.414 L/sec placebo, 95% confidence interval =0.136–0.693) or mean improvement in quality of life (0.090 active agent vs 0.117 placebo, 95% CI = –.096 to .0150). Neither was there any significant difference in any of the secondary outcomes. These results were independent of the subjects’ belief in complementary medicine. "
Then there is this paper:
http://www.dcscience
.net/homeopathy_pape
r_for_nhs_commission
ers.pdf
which has many trials and studies. On the basis of this paper many NHS trusts to reduce funding for homoeopathy.
The results of the trials seem to vary from 'possible slight effect but poor methodology' to 'Robust methodology and no effect'.
Conclusion: "Such evidence as exists to support use of homeopathy is very weak. There remains a relatively strong possibility that any observed benefits may be mediated by a placebo effect. Trials and meta-analysis provoke strong reactions from both sides of the debate. Homeopaths and many patients believe strongly in the benefits of this therapy. However the scientific evidence in favour of medical benefit is equivocal at best, despite many years of research and hundreds of studies."
And the opinion of the BMA
http://www.telegraph
.co.uk/health/altern
ativemedicine/772828
1/Homeopathy-is-witc
hcraft-say-doctors.h
tml
"The BMA has previously expressed scepticism about homoeopathy, arguing that the rationing body, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence should examine the evidence base and make a definitive ruling about the use of the remedies in the NHS.
Finally, the annual conference of junior doctors has gone further, with a vote overwhelmingly supporting a blanket ban, and an end to all placements for trainee doctors which teach them homeopathic principles."
That's a quick search for studies and medical opinions regarding Homoeopathy.
Ashles
says...
3:31pm Tue 22 Nov 11
maybeitstrue wrote:How on earth would the study of medical benefits of a treatment be an 'inappropriate field of study or investigation' for science?
Scientism :the uncritical application of scientific or quasi-scientific methods to inappropriate fields of study or investigation The Lancet?? Are you serious? Why would a paper like that publish anything in support of homeopathy when homeopathy opposes allopathic medicine, of which The Lancet is a mouthpiece, funded partly by pharmaceutical companies. The first study is published by The Swiss federal government. Not good enough for you?
Also the term 'allopathic' was invented by Hahnemann (the inventor of Homoeopathy) so it has no real medical meaning other than it is any medicine that isn't homoeopathic.
I see you are resorting to the old 'conspiracy' claim again rather than actually adressing the studies themselves.
It's a bit sad when people can only attack the source of the message rather than the studies (which weren't actually carried out by the Lancet).
And as I have already highlighted, pharmaceutical companies could make a fortune selling and researching homoeopathy if it actually worked. And they might actual learn something new about it (as opposed to homoeopaths who don't appear to have changed or learned a single new thing about homoeopathy since it was invented 200 years ago).
And I notice you ignored all the other studies?
It also looks like I will have to repeat what I said earlier - in order to actually have an opinion on a study one generally has to wait until it is actually published. I have no idea what the Swiss Federal study in reality does or doesn't conclude, or what the goals or methodology are. All we know of this study is what a homoeopathic site claims about it - which is hardly unbiased.
I am also confused - are you saying if this Swiss Federal Study is scientific then science is okay? So a scientific study is acceptable if it shows evidence FOR homoeopathy, but it's 'scientism' and wrong and inappropriate if the studies show evidence AGAINST homoeopathy?
I hope all the fence sitters are enjoying this display of how homoeopaths keep moving the goalposts.
MediumRare
says...
3:42pm Tue 22 Nov 11
"Claims you cannot make
You must remove any content from your website that claims directly or
indirectly that homeopathy and homeopathic products can diagnose/treat/help
health conditions."
That. as Justin points out, is why the lunatics have moved to this asylum.
maybeitstrue
says...
4:10pm Tue 22 Nov 11
y.org/research/basic
/Elia.pdf
How about that one? I could probably cite references to 100 good quality research papers publish by bona vide Universities but I'm sure that wouldn't be enough for you
maybeitstrue
says...
4:15pm Tue 22 Nov 11
co.uk/commentisfree/
2007/dec/19/comment.
health?fb=native&CMP
=FBCNETTXT9038
And here is the one you could not see. Do you guys belong to the flat earth society by any chance?
Hi Spaniola
says...
4:52pm Tue 22 Nov 11
Ashles
says...
9:25am Wed 23 Nov 11
maybeitstrue wrote:???
http://www.guardian. co.uk/commentisfree/ 2007/dec/19/comment. health?fb=native&
;CMP =FBCNETTXT9038 And here is the one you could not see. Do you guys belong to the flat earth society by any chance?
That isn't a study, and it doesn't actually provide a single piece of evidence towards homoeopathy. It doesn't even provide evidence towards the sub claim water-memory.
Did you actually read that piece? It seems to say nothing apeart from that homoeopathy might be real because diamond and graphite are both made of carbon (???) and water has unusual properties (which it does, but not the claimed water memory which is the only one relevant to homoeopathy).
It is also very thoroughly dissected in the comments beow it.
Not sure what the flat earth comment has to do with anything. I am the one providing links to a variety of scientific studies. You are the one providing opinion pieces.
Also, and most interestingly, Rustum Roy is a well known homoeopathic proponent who was a regular visitor to the James Randi forums where his theories were pulled apart many, many times. If I recall correctly he was invited to apply for the million dollar challenge to demonstrate any effect from homoeopathy. He did not do so.
maybeitstrue
says...
9:32am Wed 23 Nov 11
y.org/research/basic
/Elia.pdf is not good enough for you. The flat earth reference is because you blindly refuse to see that the memory of water is real. Refute the results of the above experiment if you can. I'm sure you'll find something wrong with it, simply because to do otherwise would mean admitting you are wrong.
maybeitstrue
says...
9:35am Wed 23 Nov 11
Ashles
says...
9:57am Wed 23 Nov 11
maybeitstrue wrote:That one is the first interesting study you have put up. The purported conclusions are at first glance interesting. I promose will read it in more detail (can you honestly say you will do the same about the studies I have posted links to?)
http://www.homeopath y.org/research/basic /Elia.pdf How about that one? I could probably cite references to 100 good quality research papers publish by bona vide Universities but I'm sure that wouldn't be enough for you
However there is a bit of an issue. This doesn't provide any actual evidence towards homoeopathy, it is simply looking at a possible unusual physiochemical properties of water involving extreme dilution. Even if water memory were to be clearly demonstrated tomorrow this in itself would mean nothing for the efficacy homoeopathy. Water would have to not only have a 'memory', it would have to make a non-physical effect stronger with repeated dilution, it would have to 'remember' and emulate the effects of molecules that no longer existed in the solution, and the concept of 'like-cures-like' would have to be demonstrated. Above all homoeopathy would still have to be demonstrated to work.
Ashles
says...
10:10am Wed 23 Nov 11
maybeitstrue wrote:That's quite funny - I absolutely guarantee I know more about the million dollar challenge than you having been part of the site for many years and having actually helped generate some test protocols.
You obviously know very little about James Randi and his million dollar experiment. Do you know how many times he has pulled out when face dwith the possibility that he had to pull out. Oh and the experiment done by the University of Naples, http://www.homeopath y.org/research/basic /Elia.pdf is not good enough for you. The flat earth reference is because you blindly refuse to see that the memory of water is real. Refute the results of the above experiment if you can. I'm sure you'll find something wrong with it, simply because to do otherwise would mean admitting you are wrong.
The number of times James Randi has pulled out of a clear, agreed and well designed test is zero.
I have already said I will look into the above experiment (flat earth silliness does not help your argument - especially as the concept of anyone in the last almost 2500 years really believing the earth is flat is itself a myth)
JustFactsNotFear
says...
1:55pm Sun 27 Nov 11
Sadly the issues are rarely what the papers publish, the issues are often what they do not (also called false dichotomy). As a devoted citizen to the city of Brighton & Hove I challenge the Argus to be brave and stand with the community and parents of B&H and publish the facts on Vaccines, the Antithesis.
May I also be so bold as to point Emily Walker, Chief Reporter in the direction of Comparing Natural Immunity With Vaccines Presented by Trevor Gunn, BSc, LCH RSHom, Graduate in Biochemistry @ The Steiner School, Roedean Road, Brighton.
I might actual purchase the Argus to see a double spread on what he has to present on these serious topics. Any reporter at the Argus could try Worthing based http://www.informedp
arent.co.uk or for the small cost of £2.50 you could purchase http://www.nealsyard
remedies.com/underst
anding-mmr-booklet which is currently being sold by NYR Brighton.
Before any parent, doctor, teacher, government “official” or “news”paper choose to put infants health at risk they should maybe partake in a little data gathering and reading first. If your still unfamiliar with some of the topics raised here to offer a starting point, please google any of the headlines below to find a little balance to this unpleasant debate.
“Vaccinated Children Have 2 to 5 Times More Diseases and Disorders Than Unvaccinated Children” - A German study released in September 2011 of about 8000 UNVACCINATED children, newborn to 19 years, show vaccinated children have at least 2 to 5 times more diseases and disorders than unvaccinated children.
“The following peer-reviewed papers support the findings of the original work by Wakefield and colleagues at the Royal Free Hospital in the UK “
“BMJ (British Medical Journal) admits that fraud claim against Dr. Andrew Wakefield has no basis in fact”
“Documents emerge proving Dr Andrew Wakefield innocent; BMJ and Brian Deer caught misrepresenting the facts” - Fourteen months before Dr Wakefield's paper was published, two other researchers -- Professor Walker-Smith and Dr Amar Dhillon -- independently documented the same problems in these children, including symptoms of autism.
“Institute of Medicine adverse reactions report admits MMR vaccines cause measles, seizures, anaphylaxis and other health problems”
“What they won't admit about measles outbreaks: Most children who catch measles were already vaccinated”
“Dr Andrew Wakefield speaks on the structure of scientific revolutions: Vaccines, viruses and evolution”
“James Murdoch is still supported by GlaxoSmithKline.”
“New study: Nations requiring the most vaccines tend to have the worst infant mortality rates”
“Is Aluminum the New Thimerosal?” (Mercury)
“Vaccinations and allergy shots causing allergies to aluminum”
Other Vaccines and documented issues...
“Sixth study in recent months links mercury in flu shots to brain damage, autism”
“CDC admits flu vaccines don't work (which is why you need a new one every year)”
“NHS Trust suspends cervical cancer vaccinations after girl, 14, dies within hours of jab”
“The hepatitis B vaccine is linked to infant death, multiple sclerosis and autoimmune disorders”
“The true story of SV40, the cancer-causing virus hidden in polio vaccines”
“Dr. Jonas Salk, inventor of polio vaccine, exposed as criminal-minded scientist who conducted illicit medical experiments on mental patients”
“Dr Davis - A Traditional Medical Doctor takes a closer look at unsolved epidemics of Autism & SIDS and proposes a solution”
With 25 vaccines being given to children before they are toddlers in the UK and trends of autoimmune diseases and behaviour syndromes on the rise, perhaps it would be sensible to look at the possible role of these vaccines and other environmental factors on children's health?
For anyone seeking further information or more importantly support on issues raised here please try.
http://arnica.org.uk
/
P.s Hope this hot topic helps generate more web traffic for you Argus.
monkeymoo says...
12:41pm Wed 16 Nov 11
Maybe that should be The Argus' next poll!