Vaccines: how do I talk to my anti-vac wife about it?

[Belz...]

The biggest trouble is that my wife is one of those folks who believes in natural-is-better: she's way into homeopathy, wants to do a nearly unassisted childbirth (don't even know how I'll deal with that), says that the human body works best without medical intervention, and so on.

Yeah, the infantile mortality rate was much better before they had assisted childbirth.

[joke] Maybe you can slap her round a few times to knock the stupid out. [/joke]

 

[laca]

I would agree that engaging in an argument with narrow-minded people who are in the grip of a fear-based mythology has potential to be dangerous and that's probably just as true today as it ever was.

Your lot have a long history of fining and imprisoning 1000s of people for refusing to be endangered by vaccination. On several occasions, countries have made it illegal to administer vaccinations after countless deaths and severe illness followed the forced immunization attacks; that was the only way to stop the doctors from continuing to pedal their deadly products.

Compare that to the danger you might face from the anti-vaxxers. At worst, you might get a bloody nose from trying to forcibly vaccinate me! You couldn't possibly get measles from me because you're so well protected by your vaccine!

(For references please see my previous post)

Are we playing count the fallacies and lies? It's not fun.

 

[Chris Haynes]

...snip...
The following excerpts are from Vaccines and Serum Evils by Herbert Shelton. ...
Apparently in 1923, they recognised the profit potential from vaccinating most of the population instead of just treating the few who fell ill with the disease.


There's a pattern developing...





From VACCINATION ABSURDITIES AND CONTRADICTIONS.
by W.R. Hadwen, M.D., J.P. 1902)

...From Swine Flu Expose by Eleanora I. McBean, Ph.D., N.D.



The Wonderful Century by Alfred Russel Wallace


COMPULSORY VACCINATION A MENACE TO PERSONAL LIBERTY
by J. M. Peebles, M.D. (1900)


...
I think that's enough from me for now.

Yeah, the pattern is old and uneducated sources. Did you really think there was any reason to take things written less than fifty years old or by hacks like Eleonara McBean and Russell Blaylock?

It really shows how shallow your position is when you have to go back a century for "evidence."

 

[trusetheeker]

...
In medicine we have a saying about not looking for zebras when you hear hoof beats.
...

How about doing us a favor and start looking for zebras! You're literally killing and maiming us. Your iatrogenic mistakes are claimed to be the third most fatal disease in the USA. Those, of course, are the mistakes that you admit to and even that is no doubt just a subset of the actual mistakes.

My wife is an ex-surgical theatre nurse and many of our friends are hospital staff at one level or another. We know what goes on in hospitals and how much of that never reaches the public. I also have 54 years experience as a customer of the medical industry including dealing with the health issues of my 3 children over 30 years and caring for my wife who suffers from Multiple Sclerosis. As an ex-nurse, my wife cannot seem to let go of her faith in the medical industry and will not consider changing her unhealthy diet because doctors tell her that it is not a factor in MS. She has also been suffering from an ulcer for the last 8 months that the medical teams seem completely confused on how to treat.

Almost every one that I know is suffering from medical complaints that physicians are unable to cure. Instead these people go from year to year, hooked on prescriptions that are obviously never going to make them better. A good friend of mine is type 2 diabetic and he thinks olive oil is a health food. The medical industry has known about the link between high-fat diets and diabetes for decades so how is it that his doctor hasn't explained this critical point to him.

People are self-curing at a surprising rate by means of water-only fasting, many who don't really understand what they're doing or why it works but they have no problem recognising the health benefits achieved as a result. Natural Hygienists and many other professionals who counsel clients on the importance of a healthy, species-correct diet are seeing those clients achieve exceptional levels of health despite years of drugging by the medical industry. Does that industry take notice and try to learn from these successes? No! They take every opportunity to shutdown these successful practitioners who are competing with the medical industries' monopoly on health provision.

And just how successful is modern medicine?

Iatrogenic Disease: The 3rd Most Fatal Disease in the USA
Ronald Grisanti D.C., D.A.B.C.O.,M.S.

http://www.yourmedicaldetective.com/public/335.cfm
http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/284/4/483

The high cost of the health care system is considered to be a deficit, but it seems to be tolerated under the assumption that better health results from more expensive care.

However, evidence from a few studies indicates that as many as 20% to 30% of patients receive inappropriate care.

An estimated 44,000 to 98,000 among these patients die each year as a result of medical errors.

This might be tolerable if it resulted in better health, but does it?

Out of 13 countries in a recent comparison, the United States ranks an average of 12th (second from the bottom) for 16 available health indicators.

More specifically, the ranking of the U.S. on several indicators was:

13th (last) for low-birth-weight percentages
13th for neonatal mortality and infant mortality overall
11th for post-neonatal mortality
13th for years of potential life lost (excluding external causes)
11th for life expectancy, at 1 year for females, 12th for males
10th for life expectancy, at 15 years for females, 12th for males
10th for life expectancy, at 40 years for females, 9th for males
7th for life expectancy, at 65 years for females, 7th for males
3rd for life expectancy, at 80 years for females, 3rd for males

The poor performance of the U.S. was recently confirmed by a World Health Organization study which used different data and ranked the United States as 15th among 25 industrialized countries.

I've personally seen significant improvement in my health since coming to a better understanding of physiology and moving away from the standard American diet (SAD.) My digestive system difficulties disappeared early on but I've proven on a few occasions that I can easily suffer from them again just by partaking of too many highly-processed foods or regularly drinking alcoholic beverages. If I want to suffer from sinus congestion and hayfever, all I have to do is regularly use dairy products and hey presto, they're back. Eating animal products of any kind is a useful way to get my limited arthritis to flare up.

If I suffered a severe trauma, I'd be straight to the local emergency room for help getting put back together. There are some things that you doctors are actually very good at. If I want advice on healthy living and freedom from disease, I'd sooner ask anybody besides a doctor.

 

[Sledge]

People are self-curing at a surprising rate by means of water-only fasting

********. Stop spreading this reprehensible garbage.

 

[TubbaBlubba]

People are self-curing at a surprising rate by means of water-only fasting

Can you cure "Fear-of-Water" with this method?

 

[trusetheeker]

********. Stop spreading this reprehensible garbage.

Better yet, don't bad mouth something that you know nothing about.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

I would agree that engaging in an argument with narrow-minded people who are in the grip of a fear-based mythology has potential to be dangerous and that's probably just as true today as it ever was.

Your lot have a long history of fining and imprisoning 1000s of people for refusing to be endangered by vaccination. On several occasions, countries have made it illegal to administer vaccinations after countless deaths and severe illness followed the forced immunization attacks; that was the only way to stop the doctors from continuing to pedal their deadly products.

Cleve dodge attempt, but we were discussing the dangers of questioning doctors.

Compare that to the danger you might face from the anti-vaxxers.

Oh, any time.

You couldn't possibly get measles from me because you're so well protected by your vaccine!

Yes, because I'm surrounded by vaccinated people, old enough to have received a vaccination, and fortunate enough not to have been brainwashed by the scare-mongering of "your lot".

My wife is an ex-surgical theatre nurse and many of our friends are hospital staff at one level or another. We know what goes on in hospitals and how much of that never reaches the public. I also have 54 years experience as a customer of the medical industry including dealing with the health issues of my 3 children over 30 years and caring for my wife who suffers from Multiple Sclerosis. As an ex-nurse, my wife cannot seem to let go of her faith in the medical industry and will not consider changing her unhealthy diet because doctors tell her that it is not a factor in MS. She has also been suffering from an ulcer for the last 8 months that the medical teams seem completely confused on how to treat.

I'm reminded of the CT anecdotes we got after 9/11 -- "I have a friend whose cousin is a firefighter, and he heard that firefighters were talking about explosives"

Almost every one that I know is suffering from medical complaints that physicians are unable to cure.

What on earth is your point? That because there still are many ailments we (or for that matter, alternative medicine) can't cure yet, vaccines don't work?

Instead these people go from year to year, hooked on prescriptions that are obviously never going to make them better.

"Obviously". Just like the earth was once obviously flat. Got any actual facts?

A good friend of mine...

</anecdote>

People are self-curing at a surprising rate...

</anecdote>

...many who don't really understand what they're doing...

No kidding?

...but they have no problem recognising the health benefits achieved as a result.

When you measure their effects against control groups, however...

And just how successful is modern medicine?

Iatrogenic Disease: The 3rd Most Fatal Disease in the USA
Ronald Grisanti D.C., D.A.B.C.O.,M.S.

http://www.yourmedicaldetective.com/public/335.cfm
http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/284/4/483

Again you ask one thing and answer another. You find the "efficiency" of modern science, or, well, of anything, by comparing successes to failures. Let's say a plane crashes. Can we conclude from the crash that planes are safe? No, we have to look at the number of successful flights, and what they accomplish, and then measure that against the number of crashes. Does every other plane crash? Every thousandth? One in 50 million?

I've personally seen significant improvement in my health...

</anecdote>

If I suffered a severe trauma, I'd be straight to the local emergency room for help getting put back together. There are some things that you doctors are actually very good at.

Oh? I can name lots of people who went to ER and didn't come out alive due to mistakes or malpractice or whatever. By your logic, this means emergency rooms are deadly.

 

[Sledge]

Better yet, don't bad mouth something that you know nothing about.

Excellent advice, when do you plan to start?

 

[trusetheeker]

Cleve dodge attempt, but we were discussing the dangers of questioning doctors.

As I had already answered your question, I presumed I was free to move forward in the discussion. Obviously I strayed from the narrow parameters you felt safe to work within.

Yes, because I'm surrounded by vaccinated people, old enough to have received a vaccination, and fortunate enough not to have been brainwashed by the scare-mongering of "your lot".

Apparently your vaccination only protects you from the disease if no one around you is carrying it. What sort of protection is that?

I'm reminded of the CT anecdotes we got after 9/11 -- "I have a friend whose cousin is a firefighter, and he heard that firefighters were talking about explosives"

I'm reminded of the video evidence where firefighters specifically state they heard explosions and described the collapse as a controlled demolition. I'm also reminded of reading numerous official witness statements made by firemen and EMTs. Hell, I can even remember watching video footage of the collapses and all of the evidence of explosions, undeniable (except by see-no-evil, hear-no-evil, speak-no-evil monkees.) What's your point? That I should be willing to accept evidence produced by some faceless boffin before that of my own personal experience?

What on earth is your point? That because there still are many ailments we (or for that matter, alternative medicine) can't cure yet, vaccines don't work?

No, my point is that vaccines don't work, have never worked and exist today only because of falsified test results (effectiveness) and death certificates (safety.) My point is that I'm lucky that none of my children were killed by vaccinations although it is now clear to me that their chronic illnesses as well as my own were likely to have been vaccine related. My daughters began a 15 year cycle of ear infections just after their MMR shots although not soon enough after for us to make the connection. I suffered sinusitis during my USAF basic training, aged 20 years old, shortly after having my initial batch of vaccinations. From that point on, I suffered from hayfever and bronchitis until 33 years later when I discovered Natural Hygiene.

My point is also that, for all their arrogance, medical doctors are as clueless as the general public about maintaining health and regaining it once lost. Their years of training teaches them how to treat symptoms and ignore the root causes of disease. Their focus on germs and viruses and genes blinds them to the truth that we are naturally healthy animals and all we need to be and remain healthy is an optimum environment which includes pure air, pure water, wholesome food, sufficient rest, sleep, exercise, sunshine and shelter (to pick out the main ones.) Acute disease is not an attack on the body by foreign influences but an attempt by the body to eliminate excess toxicity often using secondary channels of elimination e.g. mucous membranes, lungs, and skin. Hence, any attempt to fight the symptoms of this elimination process will interfere with it and increase the toxicity level of the body thereby endangering vital organs and eventually leading to a vicious cycle of increasing toxicity and failure of the body's eliminative functions resulting in death.

Think about that next time you hear of a physician trying to bring down a patient's fever or treating a rash or cough with medicine of any type.

"Obviously". Just like the earth was once obviously flat. Got any actual facts?

Not that I can bothered to produce. You will know that what I'm saying is true unless you've been living the exclusive life of a hermit.

When you measure their effects against control groups, however...

Control groups are for research projects. You don't need one when your symptoms clear up while undergoing a fast or just improving your diet. It's sufficient to know that you're no longer suffering.

Again you ask one thing and answer another. You find the "efficiency" of modern science, or, well, of anything, by comparing successes to failures. Let's say a plane crashes. Can we conclude from the crash that planes are safe? No, we have to look at the number of successful flights, and what they accomplish, and then measure that against the number of crashes. Does every other plane crash? Every thousandth? One in 50 million?

Apples and oranges. If we limit your plane crash success criteria to an equal number of safe take offs and landings, it's easy to measure the number of successes. If instead, we add a criteria that all passengers had to be free of jet-lag following the flight, it becomes harder to measure success. Do we monitor each passenger for 1 week post-flight for symptoms and, if we find symptoms, do we conclude that the symptoms were actually caused by the flight and not some other factor? Do we rely on passengers to contact us if they have symptoms and otherwise count them as symptom-free?

If a plane crashes, do we immediately count that as a failure or do we check the records to see if any underlying causes contributed to the crash and therefore state that the flight itself would have been successful if the plane had been strong enough to complete it?

Sounds crazy but such is the outlandish world of measuring vaccination effectiveness and safety.

Oh? I can name lots of people who went to ER and didn't come out alive due to mistakes or malpractice or whatever. By your logic, this means emergency rooms are deadly.

I completely agree but I also see very little alternative. If my arm's half-severed after an accident, I will see no shame in seeking the assistance of people trained to deal with such circumstances. Once sewn up, I'll be out of there and out of reach of their drugs at the earliest opportunity.

 

[laca]

No, my point is that vaccines don't work, have never worked and exist today only because of falsified test results (effectiveness) and death certificates (safety.)

Quite a point. Got anything to back that up?

On second thought, not just any thing would do. You'd have to show how every single peer-reviewed paper and research showing the effectiveness and safety of vaccines has been a complete and utter fabrication. Any sane person would recognize that this is sheer lunacy. Not anti-vaxxers, though. They are a different breed altogether. They must have been the ones that denied that fire was useful for early humans, that a club or spear is ineffective against a predator or prey, that working together during hunting has no benefits and sex is just a hoax of the pr0n industry to sell movies, contraceptives, lubricants and whatnot. If anything threatens the theory of evolution by natural selection, the continued existence of anti-vaxxers is as good as it gets.

 

[trusetheeker]

Quite a point. Got anything to back that up?

On second thought, not just any thing would do. You'd have to show how every single peer-reviewed paper and research showing the effectiveness and safety of vaccines has been a complete and utter fabrication. Any sane person would recognize that this is sheer lunacy. Not anti-vaxxers, though. They are a different breed altogether. They must have been the ones that denied that fire was useful for early humans, that a club or spear is ineffective against a predator or prey, that working together during hunting has no benefits and sex is just a hoax of the pr0n industry to sell movies, contraceptives, lubricants and whatnot. If anything threatens the theory of evolution by natural selection, the continued existence of anti-vaxxers is as good as it gets.

How did our ancestors ever survive for at least 40,000 years before the invention of modern medicine (by the ancient Greeks.) For that matter, how did dinosaurs rule the planet for millions of years without veterinarians? It boggles the mind!

 

[excaza]

If my arm's half-severed after an accident, I will see no shame in seeking the assistance of people trained to deal with such circumstances.

Yet you are actively advocating for the blatant disregard of the advice of people trained to deal with disease.

 

[excaza]

How did our ancestors ever survive for at least 40,000 years before the invention of modern medicine (by the ancient Greeks.) For that matter, how did dinosaurs rule the planet for millions of years without veterinarians? It boggles the mind!

What exactly are you trying to prove with this statement?

 

[commandlinegamer]

What exactly are you trying to prove with this statement?

That his argument is a mastery of the absurd?

 

[Estellea]

How did our ancestors ever survive for at least 40,000 years before the invention of modern medicine (by the ancient Greeks.) For that matter, how did dinosaurs rule the planet for millions of years without veterinarians? It boggles the mind!

Survive? Yes, to some degree obviously. But how many died of and were permanently injured by infectious diseases prior to prophylaxis? It is a vapid argument that mere survival for some is acceptable. I have also found anti-vax arguments (particularly those who rely upon that bastion of lunacy, whale.to are rife with eugenics, which you appear to be suggesting.

Este

 

[Tatyana]

But the swine flu WASN'T a big problem and we don't know the kind of side effects that viruses have until we have studied their use for years, no?

So why would you insist that someone who is not likely to contract a virus and is in good general health inject the virus into their body?

Or am I terribly mistaken? I've always thought that the vaccine IS the virus just a milder version (in laymans terms)

What looks insane to me is to take a virus you are not likely to contract and inject it into your body to build up your immune system "just in case" you catch it.

That seems very stupid in my opinion.


Would you inject a milder version of HIV into your system to help you create what's needed to fight the infection? Let's put it that way? If you are not likely to contract the virus only an idiot would do that IMO.

Of course I'm sure I'm misunderstood so I'm happily sitting here waiting for someone to make it make sense. I'd love to have this explained more fully to me. Because honestly it doesn't make any sense why you would get angry at someone for not doing what you choose for your body.


Also please keep in mind that I do think that if I were in a situation that would make it likely to contract the virus I would definitely take the vaccine. (also as I pointed out, my kids have had regular immunizations) However what is the likelihood that my kids will contract the swine flu, and on top of that what is the likelihood that it will be very serious for them to recover? Compare that to the potential problems that include "dumb people giving the injections who screw up for some reason" and to me the second threat is more real and serious than the first.


Especially because your body is designed to defend itself against infection.


And

exhibit A

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/SwineFluNews/school-staffers-insulin-swine-flu-shot/story?id=9606504

If you think that a flu that is three times as deadly to children and pregnant women and killed far more children and pregnant women, directly killed patients, rather than the typical 40 - 50, 000 elderly or immune compromised people who sometimes die of complications from the flu, I guess it wasn't that bad.

We have studied influenza A viruses for years, we know how antigenic drift works, which is why there is often such a grave concern about it.

We are long overdue a global pandemic like the Spanish flu in the 1920s.

In the first 25 years of HIV/AIDs, 25 million people have died.

In the first 25 weeks of the 1918 flu, 25 million people died.

The population of the world was much lower at that time, and there also wasn't the same sort of global transport.

The flu virus isn't a live or attenuated virus, it is a subunit of the virus, so it is impossible to catch the flu.

Your immune system is going to do EXACTLY the same thing encountering the antigens from the vaccine or encountering the antigens on the wild virus.

One of the distinguishing characteristics of Spanish flu pandemic is that it killed young, healthy people (those with a 'strong' immune system).

Contrary to popular belief, a 'strong' immune system isn't always an advantage.

We feel dreadful when we have a cold because of the immune system response, all of the cells and cytokines produce the fever, aches, and pains.

There is this thing called a cytokine storm, where the immune system basically freaks out when it encounters something that is so foreign to it that it really isn't sure what to do about it.

This is what is though to be the reason so many people died from the flu, and why some people continue to die and need respiratory support, they drown in their own lung secretions, due to the 'swelling' (flooding the area) part of the basic immune system response.

This is also why an elderly person can survive a blood transfusion accident, whereas a young healthy person would die quite quickly from disseminated intravascular coagulation (and cytokine storm from immune system freak out).

I personally love immunology, it has been a fairly large part of my studies at university and in my job, and it is rather complicated, and I find it frustrating that people really don't have the foggiest about it.

There is no such thing as 'building up' your immune system.

You get immunised so that your body will move through the innate to the more specific adaptive immune response where your body produces antibodies specific to the pathogen.

This typically takes about two weeks.

A lot of damage from a bacteria or virus can happen in two weeks, so once our immune system has encountered a pathogen, it creates memory cells that have the ability to create new antibodies quickly and by pass the two week delay of the innate immune system.

The antibodies (made by B cells) stick to the pathogen, cytokines are released to trigger and signal other cells, and then another macrophage (white cell with many names depending on the tissue it is in), eats the bacteria or virus.

Do you actually know some of the nasty things our immune system produces, especially the innate immune system?

Think free radicals and hydrogen peroxide and tryptase to dissolve through out own body tissues to get to where the pathogen is.

You really, really, really WANT the adaptive, antibody based immune response, and you want it as fast as possible.

So yes, you are terribly mistaken.

Terribly, terribly, terribly mistaken.


PS. Just because your sons have never had a cold or flu (which I would question), doesn't mean they are never going to catch any sort of infectious disease.

http://biomedgerontology.oxfordjournals.org/content/61/10/1051.extract

The Five Cardinal Signs of Inflammation: Calor, Dolor, Rubor, Tumor … and Penuria (Apologies to Aulus Cornelius Celsus, De medicina, c. A.D. 25)

 

[Safe-Keeper]

Apparently your vaccination only protects you from the disease if no one around you is carrying it. What sort of protection is that?

No vaccine offers a 100% protection. They're like bike helmets and seatbelts and lifevests and ejection seats and every other kind of protective measure. So yes, having other people around you vaccinated boosts my odds even more than just "getting the shot" myself. There's also all the people who can't be vaccinated for various reasons (age, allergies, etc.), for whom herd immunity is vital.

I'm reminded of the video evidence...

Once again you go off on some wild unrelated tangent... my point was that "I've got a friend who is a (insert suitable profession here) who said (insert suitable thing here)" isn't evidence. I have a friend in a suitable profession who told me this, so it must be true.

No, my point is that vaccines don't work, have never worked and exist today only because of falsified test results (effectiveness) and death certificates (safety.)

My point is that I'm lucky that none of my children were killed by vaccinations although it is now clear to me that their chronic illnesses as well as my own were likely to have been vaccine related. My daughters began a 15 year cycle of ear infections just after their MMR shots although not soon enough after for us to make the connection. I suffered sinusitis during my USAF basic training, aged 20 years old, shortly after having my initial batch of vaccinations. From that point on, I suffered from hayfever and bronchitis until 33 years later when I discovered Natural Hygiene.

I'm sorry to hear all this. I'm glad you're doing better.

Not that I can bothered to produce. You will know that what I'm saying is true unless you've been living the exclusive life of a hermit.

Sorry, but if you want to convince people in any setting you have to produce evidence. Them's the grapes.

Control groups are for research projects. You don't need one when your symptoms clear up while undergoing a fast or just improving your diet. It's sufficient to know that you're no longer suffering.

No, because your improvement may be due to the placebo effect, other treatment you're undergoing, imagination or sheer coincidence. You need more than anecdotes to determine if something works. You need a control group. You can't just go around and peddle snake oil to thousands of people and remark that some of them feel better after buying your remedy. You need to look at how many experience improvement, what the side-effects are, and how the treatment stacks up to those already in circulation.

Apples and oranges.

No. In order to determine how safe something is, you have to look at not only single plane crashes ("I heard a plane crashed once, obviously they're dangerous!"), but also how often they happen compared to all the times they could have happened. This goes for all things, by the way, not just airplanes and vaccines.

If three airliners go down out of 10, this means flying is incredibly dangerous, statistically. If three airliners go down, out of 10 000 000, that's a completely different story.

If we limit your plane crash success criteria to an equal number of safe take offs and landings, it's easy to measure the number of successes. If instead, we add a criteria that all passengers had to be free of jet-lag following the flight, it becomes harder to measure success. Do we monitor each passenger for 1 week post-flight for symptoms and, if we find symptoms, do we conclude that the symptoms were actually caused by the flight and not some other factor? Do we rely on passengers to contact us if they have symptoms and otherwise count them as symptom-free?

If we're looking into the statistics of plane crashes, obviously we're not going to ask passengers if they feel jet lag or other flight-related symptoms after the flight, no.

If a plane crashes, do we immediately count that as a failure

Yes, if we're counting plane crashes we count plane crashes as plane crashes.

 

[Tatyana]

I have had my kids vaccinated, but if you had read my posts you would see I pointed out the same thing.

Thus for the OPs wife she's probably in the same boat which is something to consider. If the OP is nervous about the health of his child, it is important to consider that the likelihood of contracting one of these illnesses WILL BE next to nil, since everyone around him is likely to have had the vaccination.

If this is the reality then it really is not that irresponsible of his wife not to get her child vaccinated. She's probably not concerned about numbers, she's probably scared for her own baby.

Also I'm not sure but I don't think you can vaccinate for the common flu and I know there is no vaccination for the common cold.

It is my belief that doctors overprescribed antibiotics years ago and because of this many children have weak immune systems because they didn't have a chance to build up a strong one.

No, antibiotics have nothing to do with 'weakening the immune' and that term is almost entirely rubbish.

The only modern issue with the immune system may be 'the clean house hypothesis' that may, note may result in an increased risk of autoimmune disorders, which is NOT a weakened immune system but an overly active one.

As we no longer encounter as many parasites, one of our T helper pathways is not activated and it is thought the other T helper pathway is over active, resulting in more 'self' antigen presenting to the B cells which then make antibodies directed against self.

As well, we are born with just about every single pathogen we will encounter programmed in the genetic code of the immune system cells. Millions and millions of little antibody codes, however, it is just that the cells have to undergo affinity maturation, antigen switching and clonal expansion (about two weeks)before they can effectively deal with a rapidly dividing bacteria or virus.

No offense, but you are really clueless about what the immune system is.

Most people are.

In fact, if you asked people to tell you exactly what is the immune system, I would guess 80% wouldn't be able to name one component of the immune system.

 

[Tatyana]

Like what?

People are getting pissed off at the very unpopular truth that the woman's baby is probably fine without the vaccines for a few years because the baby will be protected by herd immunizations. That's a fact is it not?

Sorry you think it's selfish or mean or whatever else people want to say just because they don't like it, but it is a fact.

I keep thinking about meningitis and babies getting lumbar punctures.

Ironically, it is things like meningitis or intra-uterine rubella infections that are the only KNOWN causes of autism and account for something like 6-10% of all cases of autism.