If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
"Beware of Vaccine Bullies"--Malkin column
Beware of vaccine bullies
Michelle Malkin February 4, 2004 Why on earth should we vaccinate our newborn baby against Hepatitis B -- a virus that is contracted mostly through intravenous drug use and sexual contact? That is the question my husband and I had for the doctors and nurses at the hospital where our son was born two and a half months ago. We didn't get very good answers. It was "convenient," "recommended" and "routine," the medical staff assured us. We wanted more information. A nurse gave us a brochure, which explained that babies whose mothers had the Hep B virus were at high risk of developing acute Hep B infections. Well, I tested negative for Hep B. The Centers for Disease Control named unprotected sex, IV drug use and being stuck with a needle on the job as the likeliest routes of Hep B transmission. Well, my husband and I both work primarily from home, our two children stay at home, and neither we nor our 3-year-old daughter nor our baby (for heaven's sake!) live the Kid Rock-and-Pamela Anderson Lee lifestyle. When we told the hospital staff that we simply wanted more time to think about giving the Hep B shot to our son -- doesn't "informed consent" mean we should be truly informed? -- we were badgered aggressively. Some lectured us about the need to "get on the proper vaccination schedule." Others warned that Maryland, like more than 40 other states, requires all schoolchildren to be vaccinated for Hep B. Teachers, however, are not subject to the mandate, which is driven not just by altruistic concern for children's health. Ohio legislator Dale Van Vyven snuck the Hep B mandate into a 1998 hazardous-waste bill at the behest of profit-maximizing vaccine manufacturers' lobbyists. The "everybody does it" and "for the greater good" arguments worked when we were overcautious, over-trusting, first-time parents who submitted our daughter to every single vaccine without question. This time, we resolved not to be rushed or bullied. We declined to give our son the politically correct Hep B shot, decided to do more research, and then took up the issue with our pediatrician. Boy, were we in for a rude awakening. Our doctor parroted the American Academy of Pediatrics line and mindlessly emphasized the efficacy of vaccines in eradicating childhood diseases. Well, we weren't questioning their collective efficacy. We questioned what the individual health benefits and health risks to our newborn were. Physicians have blindly plied vaccines before that have done more harm than good. A childhood rotavirus vaccine, for example, was approved for widespread use in 1998 and withdrawn from the market less than a year later after causing an increase in the incidence of painful bowel obstruction among infants. Our doctor, however, pooh-poohed our inquiries about potential side effects. He seemed to have no idea what those risks were and no interest in finding out. He was also incredibly condescending: "95 percent of what you read on the Internet" is unreliable, he sermonized, as if we were too dumb to separate scientific fact from fraud. In the end, we concluded that some of the vaccines were more worth the risks than others. At my son's two-month checkup, the pediatrician expected him to receive a triple-combination shot called "Pediarix" (consisting of Hep B, inactivated polio, and DTaP, which covers diphtheria, tetanus and acellular pertussis), as well as HiB (for certain bacterial infections) and Prevnar (for meningitis and blood infections). I reiterated my refusal of Hep B, accepted DTaP and HiB, and asked to put off polio and Prevnar. In response, I received a threat: Get all the vaccines or get out of our practice. "Informed consent"? Ha. This was uninformed coercion. We're leaving for another practice, a little bitter but wiser. The strong-arm tactics of the medical establishment mustn't intimidate parents from challenging the universal vaccine orthodoxy. When it comes to protecting our children's health, skepticism is the best medicine. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"Beware of Vaccine Bullies"--Malkin column
"JG" wrote in message ... Beware of vaccine bullies Michelle Malkin February 4, 2004 The column is available at http://www.townhall.com/columnists/m...20040204.shtml. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"Beware of Vaccine Bullies"--Malkin column
"JG" wrote in message ...
Beware of vaccine bullies Michelle Malkin February 4, 2004 Why on earth should we vaccinate our newborn baby against Hepatitis B -- a virus that is contracted mostly through intravenous drug use and sexual contact? That is the question my husband and I had for the doctors and nurses at the hospital where our son was born two and a half months ago. Because among those who *somehow* contract Hep B in childhood, in about 30-40% of the cases, a vector is never found. Mom is Hep B negative, there's no blood or sexual contact...there are other, as-yet-unidentified vectors. snip We declined to give our son the politically correct Hep B shot, decided to do more research, and then took up the issue with our pediatrician. Boy, were we in for a rude awakening. Our doctor parroted the American Academy of Pediatrics line and mindlessly emphasized the efficacy of vaccines in eradicating childhood diseases. Well, we weren't questioning their collective efficacy. We questioned what the individual health benefits and health risks to our newborn were. Physicians have blindly plied vaccines before that have done more harm than good. A childhood rotavirus vaccine, for example, was approved for widespread use in 1998 and withdrawn from the market less than a year later after causing an increase in the incidence of painful bowel obstruction among infants. Wrong. The incidence of bowel obstruction was NOT higher in the vaccinated population. This author is doing some parroting of her own. Our doctor, however, pooh-poohed our inquiries about potential side effects. He seemed to have no idea what those risks were and no interest in finding out. He was also incredibly condescending: "95 percent of what you read on the Internet" is unreliable, he sermonized, as if we were too dumb to separate scientific fact from fraud. And this "informed" research led her to decline Prevnar? Well informed indeed. In the end, we concluded that some of the vaccines were more worth the risks than others. At my son's two-month checkup, the pediatrician expected him to receive a triple-combination shot called "Pediarix" (consisting of Hep B, inactivated polio, and DTaP, which covers diphtheria, tetanus and acellular pertussis), as well as HiB (for certain bacterial infections) and Prevnar (for meningitis and blood infections). I reiterated my refusal of Hep B, accepted DTaP and HiB, and asked to put off polio and Prevnar. In response, I received a threat: Get all the vaccines or get out of our practice. Why should the doctor be compelled to keep a patient whose parents don't follow his recommendations? I can tell you *I'm* in no hurry to take care of a kid with Hib meningitis, nor invasive pneumococcal disease nor pertussis. This author is free to find a doctor who will allow her daffy decisions to usurp his training and better sense. No one is holding a gun to her head to *make* her get her child vaccinated; why does she have her panties in a twist because this particular doctor won't play her game? It's called choice: She chose not to have her child fully immunized...the doctor chose not to have her child as a patient. Pretty straighforward, I say. Mark, MD |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"Beware of Vaccine Bullies"--Malkin column
"Mark" wrote
Why on earth should we vaccinate our newborn baby against Hepatitis B -- a virus that is contracted mostly through intravenous drug use and sexual contact? That is the question my husband and I had for the doctors and nurses at the hospital where our son was born two and a half months ago. Because among those who *somehow* contract Hep B in childhood, in about 30-40% of the cases, a vector is never found. That is because of family members who do not admit to the risky sex and drug use. rotavirus vaccine, for example, was approved for widespread use in 1998 and withdrawn from the market less than a year later after causing an increase in the incidence of painful bowel obstruction among infants. Wrong. The incidence of bowel obstruction was NOT higher in the vaccinated population. That is why the vaccine was withdrawn. If you have some other explanation, please post it. Why should the doctor be compelled to keep a patient whose parents don't follow his recommendations? She made a completely rational choice. She is much better off with a ped who understands that recommendations are just that -- recommendations. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"Beware of Vaccine Bullies"--Malkin column
"Mark" wrote in message
om... "JG" wrote in message ... Beware of vaccine bullies Michelle Malkin February 4, 2004 Why on earth should we vaccinate our newborn baby against Hepatitis B --a virus that is contracted mostly through intravenous drug use and sexual contact? That is the question my husband and I had for the doctors and nurses at the hospital where our son was born two and a half months ago. Because among those who *somehow* contract Hep B in childhood, in about 30-40% of the cases, a vector is never found. Mom is Hep B negative, there's no blood or sexual contact...there are other, as-yet-unidentified vectors. Scaremonger. The likelihood of an infant/child who has diligent parents and is not subjected to to "high risk" persons--e.g., the Malkins' son--contracting hep B is no doubt so ridiculously small as to be laughable. snip We declined to give our son the politically correct Hep B shot, decided to do more research, and then took up the issue with our pediatrician. Boy, were we in for a rude awakening. Our doctor parroted the American Academy of Pediatrics line and mindlessly emphasized the efficacy of vaccines in eradicating childhood diseases. Well, we weren't questioning their collective efficacy. We questioned what the individual health benefits and health risks to our newborn were. Physicians have blindly plied vaccines before that have done more harm than good. A childhood rotavirus vaccine, for example, was approved for widespread use in 1998 and withdrawn from the market less than a year later after causing an increase in the incidence of painful bowel obstruction among infants. Wrong. The incidence of bowel obstruction was NOT higher in the vaccinated population. This author is doing some parroting of her own. Our doctor, however, pooh-poohed our inquiries about potential side effects. He seemed to have no idea what those risks were and no interest in finding out. He was also incredibly condescending: "95 percent of what you read on the Internet" is unreliable, he sermonized, as if we were too dumb to separate scientific fact from fraud. And this "informed" research led her to decline Prevnar? Well informed indeed. In the end, we concluded that some of the vaccines were more worth the risks than others. At my son's two-month checkup, the pediatrician expected him to receive a triple-combination shot called "Pediarix" (consisting of Hep B, inactivated polio, and DTaP, which covers diphtheria, tetanus and acellular pertussis), as well as HiB (for certain bacterial infections) and Prevnar (for meningitis and blood infections). I reiterated my refusal of Hep B, accepted DTaP and HiB, and asked to put off polio and Prevnar. In response, I received a threat: Get all the vaccines or get out of our practice. Why should the doctor be compelled to keep a patient whose parents don't follow his recommendations? Who said, or even suggested, he should? I can tell you *I'm* in no hurry to take care of a kid with Hib meningitis, nor invasive pneumococcal disease nor pertussis. This author is free to find a doctor who will allow her daffy decisions to usurp his training and better sense. No one is holding a gun to her head to *make* her get her child vaccinated; why does she have her panties in a twist because this particular doctor won't play her game? It doesn't sound to me like she has "her panties in a twist" at all. What did she write that gave you the impression she was bothered by having to engage a pediatrician more amenable to her views? Sure, she's "bitter" and obviously ticked off by the doctor's condescending attitude (good for her!), but I would think she's more than happy to find another pediatrician It's called choice: She chose not to have her child fully immunized...the doctor chose not to have her child as a patient. Pretty straighforward, I say. Yes. So? Looks like both parties will get what they want. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"Beware of Vaccine Bullies"--Malkin column
"JG" wrote
Scaremonger. The likelihood of an infant/child who has diligent parents and is not subjected to to "high risk" persons--e.g., the Malkins' son--contracting hep B is no doubt so ridiculously small as to be laughable. It is possible that the ped falsely assumed that Malkin is an Asian immigrant, hence at risk for HBV. Yes, much of the HBV in the USA comes from Asia, and Malkin looks like a Filipino. But Malkin was born in Philadelphia. (Her parents were Filipino immigrants.) |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"Beware of Vaccine Bullies"--Malkin column
"JG" wrote in message ... Beware of vaccine bullies Michelle Malkin February 4, 2004 Why on earth should we vaccinate our newborn baby against Hepatitis B -- a virus that is contracted mostly through intravenous drug use and sexual contact? (...) Mostly. Not entirely. Do you know if you child is going to be in a car crash and require a blood transfusion next week? Jeff (...) |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"Beware of Vaccine Bullies"--Malkin column
"Roger Schlafly" wrote in message et... "Mark" wrote Why on earth should we vaccinate our newborn baby against Hepatitis B -- a virus that is contracted mostly through intravenous drug use and sexual contact? That is the question my husband and I had for the doctors and nurses at the hospital where our son was born two and a half months ago. Because among those who *somehow* contract Hep B in childhood, in about 30-40% of the cases, a vector is never found. That is because of family members who do not admit to the risky sex and drug use. Really? Can cite evidence that this is the case for most of the kids who get hep B? How do you know that the family members don't admit to something? Are reading their minds? rotavirus vaccine, for example, was approved for widespread use in 1998 and withdrawn from the market less than a year later after causing an increase in the incidence of painful bowel obstruction among infants. Wrong. The incidence of bowel obstruction was NOT higher in the vaccinated population. That is why the vaccine was withdrawn. If you have some other explanation, please post it. Incorrect. It was temporarily withdrawn because VAERS found a *potential* increase in the rate of intussecption in kids who got the vaccine. However, the data showed that there was no statistically significant increase in intussecption. However, the company kept the vaccine off the market for fear of losing lots of money to lawsuits. (...) Jeff |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
"Beware of Vaccine Bullies"--Malkin column
"JG" wrote in message ...
"Mark" wrote in message om... "JG" wrote in message ... Beware of vaccine bullies Michelle Malkin February 4, 2004 Why on earth should we vaccinate our newborn baby against Hepatitis B --a virus that is contracted mostly through intravenous drug use and sexual contact? That is the question my husband and I had for the doctors and nurses at the hospital where our son was born two and a half months ago. Because among those who *somehow* contract Hep B in childhood, in about 30-40% of the cases, a vector is never found. Mom is Hep B negative, there's no blood or sexual contact...there are other, as-yet-unidentified vectors. Scaremonger. The likelihood of an infant/child who has diligent parents and is not subjected to to "high risk" persons--e.g., the Malkins' son--contracting hep B is no doubt so ridiculously small as to be laughable. *I'm* the scaremonger? That's a laugh. The other vectors *aren't identified*. How you know that you're being diligent in protecting your child against these vectors if you don't even know what they are? snip We declined to give our son the politically correct Hep B shot, decided to do more research, and then took up the issue with our pediatrician. Boy, were we in for a rude awakening. Our doctor parroted the American Academy of Pediatrics line and mindlessly emphasized the efficacy of vaccines in eradicating childhood diseases. Well, we weren't questioning their collective efficacy. We questioned what the individual health benefits and health risks to our newborn were. Physicians have blindly plied vaccines before that have done more harm than good. A childhood rotavirus vaccine, for example, was approved for widespread use in 1998 and withdrawn from the market less than a year later after causing an increase in the incidence of painful bowel obstruction among infants. Wrong. The incidence of bowel obstruction was NOT higher in the vaccinated population. This author is doing some parroting of her own. Our doctor, however, pooh-poohed our inquiries about potential side effects. He seemed to have no idea what those risks were and no interest in finding out. He was also incredibly condescending: "95 percent of what you read on the Internet" is unreliable, he sermonized, as if we were too dumb to separate scientific fact from fraud. And this "informed" research led her to decline Prevnar? Well informed indeed. In the end, we concluded that some of the vaccines were more worth the risks than others. At my son's two-month checkup, the pediatrician expected him to receive a triple-combination shot called "Pediarix" (consisting of Hep B, inactivated polio, and DTaP, which covers diphtheria, tetanus and acellular pertussis), as well as HiB (for certain bacterial infections) and Prevnar (for meningitis and blood infections). I reiterated my refusal of Hep B, accepted DTaP and HiB, and asked to put off polio and Prevnar. In response, I received a threat: Get all the vaccines or get out of our practice. Why should the doctor be compelled to keep a patient whose parents don't follow his recommendations? Who said, or even suggested, he should? The author's entire thesis appears to be about the unfairness of the doctor kicking her kid out of his practice. She referred to it as a "threat". I can tell you *I'm* in no hurry to take care of a kid with Hib meningitis, nor invasive pneumococcal disease nor pertussis. This author is free to find a doctor who will allow her daffy decisions to usurp his training and better sense. No one is holding a gun to her head to *make* her get her child vaccinated; why does she have her panties in a twist because this particular doctor won't play her game? It doesn't sound to me like she has "her panties in a twist" at all. What did she write that gave you the impression she was bothered by having to engage a pediatrician more amenable to her views? Sure, she's "bitter" and obviously ticked off by the doctor's condescending attitude (good for her!), but I would think she's more than happy to find another pediatrician What did she write? Let's see...the "coercion", her "bitterness", calling the Hep B "politically correct", being "threatened"...the fact that she even bothered to write an entire article in the first place leads me to believe she has a bee in her bonnet over this issue. It's called choice: She chose not to have her child fully immunized...the doctor chose not to have her child as a patient. Pretty straighforward, I say. Yes. So? Looks like both parties will get what they want. Exactly. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
"Beware of Vaccine Bullies"--Malkin column
"Mark" wrote
The author's entire thesis appears to be about the unfairness of the doctor kicking her kid out of his practice. She referred to it as a "threat". Nowhere does she say that was unfair. Her complaint was that the ped was trying to pressure her into getting vaccines that she didn't want. http://www.townhall.com/columnists/m...20040204.shtml |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Get flu, get spine adjusted? (also: college vaccination fraud) | Todd Gastaldo | Pregnancy | 0 | April 13th 04 05:42 PM |
Homeschoolers to be vaccinated | al gu | Pregnancy | 20 | March 1st 04 04:28 AM |
vaccine genocide in Uganda update | john | Kids Health | 1 | December 11th 03 02:31 PM |
Vaccination is NOT immunization/Breastfeeding *is* immunization! | Todd Gastaldo | Pregnancy | 30 | October 6th 03 09:16 PM |
CAN YOU LOSE YOUR HAIR FROM A VACCINE? | john | Kids Health | 3 | September 25th 03 04:40 AM |