Robert, they will never do widespread studies on pregnant women because what pregnant woman is going to take a chance of being a lab rat during her pregnancy?

I understand the fear of getting vaccines or doing anything during pregnancy as mothers-to-be are very protective of their unborn babies. Maybe this article could mention that women planning on getting pregnant could get this vaccine before pregnancy, therefore no possible transmission to her baby. I was offered a tetanus/pertussis vaccine recently and I got it, simply because I was due for my tetanus, and the rise of cases because people are not vaccinating their babies. Adults, who haven't been vaccinated since we were children, are coming down with whooping cough because our immunity has waned. My vaccine was called Boostrix. I have heard whooping cough in adults is absolutely miserable. Maybe these recommendations could be made.

This article is BS, like most every other article about vaccinations.

You wanna protect your baby in the first few months of life?? Simple....BREASTFEED THEM!!!!!!

Mama's breastmilk has all the passive immunity components a baby would need. Just don't tell the formula companies that, it might make them reconsider selling their harmful BS baby formula that is full of corn. We wouldn't want to stop the incessant retardation of the next generation, would we???

Oh, and before some women freak out and lambast me for trashing formula.....I understand that many women cannot breastfeed for many reasons, or that some babies do not latch on well. I get it. But there is a thing called 'donor milk', pumped by endearing women who care about their fellow mothers and babies, and will gladly pump a little extra for you and your little one. Women have been doing it for thousands of years, it's called milksharing, or wetnursing.

But this whole vaccine BS has gone WAY too far!!!!

MARK MY WORDS....in future generations we will find out that these rampant vaccinations have destroyed our natural immunity to childhood diseases. The damage will have been done, and our human race will suffer immensely.

And, if mommy GETS whooping cough DURING gestation or IMMEDIATELT AFTER BIRTH?

Oh well, don't expect REAL common sense or an intelligent comment from those who have less basic scientific literacy than a wombat.

You wanna protect your baby in the first few months of life?? Simple....BREASTFEED THEM!!!!!!

Yea... that will sure keep them from getting the Whooping Cough that Mommy has because she didn't get vaccinated....

Simple....BREASTFEED THEM!

and if you had READ the article, you would have read the part about the immunity the woman has gained from being vaccinated being passed to the baby in her breast milk.

most adults' immunity has worn off- hence, there wouldn't be any protective antibodies for an unvaccinated mother to pass on in her breast milk in the first place

and why would the whooping cough vaccine be any more dangerous to a pregnant woman than getting actual whooping cough? (it's not- it is merely miserable). it is rubella (German measles) that is known to cause birth defects

If the mom doesn't carry the immunity breastfeeding won't protect the baby. As a child I never had measles, mumps, rubella, or chicken pox. I had the antibody tests done before I got pregnant...well SURPRISE I didn't have any immunity to them. So I got an MMR shot before getting pregnant and a booster after the first pregnancy so I was immune. The chicken pox shot wasn't developed yet, so I got them at the same time my kids did when I was 30. It sucked, I couldn't breathe, or eat...I was sick for 3 weeks and had to have someone take care of the kids. So please explain how breastfeeding my kids would have given them the antibodies...SO if you don't want to get the shots and don't want to vaccinate your kid...live with the consequences.

be sure not to cough near them 1-21 days after your vax because that is the time you are most likely carrying the highest amount of pertussis bacteria in your sputum...an adult can be a carrier of pertussis after being vaxed and unknowingly put a baby at risk for contracting pertussis if the adult should cough/sneeze around the infant...

too true: The point is to be up to date on these vaccinations BEFORE you get pregnant.

Mine is up to date, and I'm not even married yet. But I would also not like to give it to someone else's kid.

the TDap vaccine is a killed vaccine- a person is not contagious nor do they have 'pertussis bacteria in your sputum'. the 21 day incubation is for ACTIVE pertussis infection

I agree... and I too just got a tetanus/pertussis combo vax and it felt like someone beat my arm with a bat too, lol. It went away in a few days though.

Can you imagine being responsible for passing whooping cough to an infant and causing his or her death? It really is a no brainer.

Just another ploy for big pharma to shoot you up with more dangerous junk. And a swollen balloon arm you can't move in the bargain? PASS.

Hotticket, You would rather your baby DIE than suffer a swollen arm for two days? Oh poor you. I guess we know where YOUR priorities lie.

who said the baby is going to die?

To be honest with you, if I read this this article a year ago, I would also be aligned with people who say this is an unnecesary shot pushed on us by big Pharma. Funny how your priorities and views change once you bring a son or daughter into the world. There is enough evidence to suggest this shot can prevent my son from getting whooping caugh and possibly die that I can't ignore, and I can't listen to every conspiracy theory out there on the internet anymore. This decision no longer effects only me. Sure this shot could be unnecessary but I will gladly take a lump in the arm and 15 dolloar co-pay to be safe.

Yes another ploy by big pharma to recommend something that significantly decreases the risk of an infant of contracting a deadly illness...oh the humanity...but you can't trust anyone that makes money right, I mean if money is involved it absolutely means someone is doing something bad or covering something up...corporate greed, rawr..

So, anybody wanna guess what these vaccines do to your immune system?

ANYONE done any research on its effects on T2 cells???

Didn't think so.

No problem. Go get your 'damn vaccine'. Shove that crap just as hard as you can into your arm and don't forget to PAY the pharma company. Hey, your future children may be retarded, but who cares, right??

In fact I have studied it Indy Patriot. As have countless scientific organizations and experts across all fields of immunology and microbiology. But I guess somehow you know something that they don't. Take your conspiracy theories and keep them to yourselves while the rest of us utilize an evidence-based and statistical approach health and medicine.

i'm just impressed there are people on here that know T cells come in different flavors.

Yes, everyone gets vaccines because they want their children to be retarded. I really hope you don't have kids, because if you do, you children will be the ones spreading these diseases to everyone elses kids because you felt your know better than professionals. Maybe it would be a better world if we didn't have doctors at all, right, because we all know they make money off people being sick? Maybe they should have never vaccinated against Polio because someone made money off of it?

Science also shows time and time again that the mutated strains of whooping cough plaguing the country are not ones we are even protected from with the vaccine. Oh.. and why do we have mutated strains? The Vaccine. EVERYTHING evolves and the more science tries to fix something, the more things that need to be fixed. Downside, just like with all the other super bugs such as MRSA, thanks to vaccines, there will soon be contagious diseases that were hardly a blip on the radar, killing by the masses and there wont be any vaccine able to stop it.

C Rhodes. Mutations do occur, and they occur whether or not we fight them or not. In 1918 tens of millions of people died of the flu, an H1N1 strain. Now, the number of deaths to H1N1 are drastically reduced. But it probably wasn't worth the medical research? Oh, and small pox evolved real well didn't it? And polio, that's definitely rampant these days. Oh, and measles and mumps, just out of control. You clearly don't know science.

Yeah, Keith, you got me. I want all the children to be born retarded. Yup. BOY, I just can't slip anything past you tonight!!!!

Oh, and yes, I have kids, who are doing just fine thankyou.

They are NOT vaccinated. Of course that means they MIGHT get one of these diseases, which means your kids are f--ked if mine ever come near yours, right? Oh wait.....I thought you said yours WERE vaccinated...........nothin to worry about, right?

And SH123, since you're the resident 'expert' here (since you have done so much research as you state), please enlighten us all as to your 'evidence-based' (read: special interest) medicine on the subject of T2 cells.

Oh, and yes, I have kids, who are doing just fine thankyou.

Same here. I have one son. Also doing just fine. My honey and I signed waivers for vaccinations.

(read: special interest) medicine on the subject of T2 cells.

You mean Th (T helper) cells, or the cytotoxic cd8+ cells? Or the plasma cells which ALSO secrete large volumes of antibodies? Those are ALL different from granulocytes and B-lymphocytes.

I'd give you a lecture Indy if it wouldn't go straight over head. Oh, and I'd definitely need a hefty fee for my time. Money comes first.

SH123, the reasons behind the devastating tolls of the 1918 influenza outbreak had more to do with unsanitary environments and lack of hygiene than lack of modern flu vaxes.

Besides, there are roughly 1000 strains of the flu virus that typically mutate from year to year anyways, and always have. Are you suggesting that modern science has vaccinated us from all 1000 strains?

Even the great Swine flu hoax was proven to have been a money-making scheme by Big Pharma, since evidence has come out that the vaccine was in the works even before the particular strain had broken out in Mexico that Spring. Australia had their flu season right before us, and there were actually far less incidences of H1N1 flu than there were for the 'regular' flu strains. Oh, and Australia didn't use the new flu vaxes.

I guess it's hard to beat Mother Nature at her game, right?

i'm just impressed there are people on here that know T cells come in different flavors.

Yeah yeah sweetheart - sort of like the granulocytes that come in neutrophil, basophil and eosinophil flavors - and the MONOCYTES, from the MYELOID line - and the T and B lymphs, and plasma cells, which are antibody producing mature variants of B Cells, or more technically, ANTIGEN PRESENTING CELLS, from the LYMPHOID line. Uh huh........next one, pleasse.......

Yes you're right the Swine flu hoax was proven to have been a money-making scheme. Proven 100%, just all of us blind sheeple running around oblivious. I could discuss vaccines further, but seeing as how my information comes from current accepted research, it probably will fall on deaf ears. In short, vaccines are a supplement to our natural immunity. Would many of us, have many of us, lived full lives without vaccines? Sure. But vaccines have been proven to be safe and effective, and have saved far many more lives than they have taken. Are they free of all side effects? No. But they are not connected to autism, nor are they "poison" to the body. We have a firm disagreement about what we believe. To each his own. But disregarding extensive scientific research because money is involved is silly to me.

ohhhh hotticket i wish my sarcasm could be conveyed on these things. that was definitely tongue in cheek up above.

SH123 you can claim that I am disregarding 'extensive scientific research' and I'll claim that you are disregarding common sense.

I've read the literature on the swine flu. It wasn't nearly as deadly as the government told us. Did you forget, or do they just not ever allow you out of your little 'science lab' in order to experience reality?

Kids have died from receiving vaccines. Yup, it's true. It doesn't happen often, but it happens. Just like kids die sometimes from mumps and measles. It doesn't happen often, but you 'science people' would make us believe that. So, I guess to some they ARE poisonous. I would take that as an example of personal preference.

Besides, I have a doctorate degree as well. I'm not stupid, Sh123. SO please go put your big d--- away and quit the condescending attitude.

I have two boys. You think I haven't read the literature out there on vaccines and childhood diseases? Stop fooling yourself....

I didn't say the swine flu hoopla wasn't over exaggerated. That still doesn't change the fact that a recommendation for vaccination was still the correct call for many people.

The condescension was probably unwarranted. But no apologies from me if you feel threatened by my big d---.

Clearly you have a working knowledge of vaccines and medicine. It's too bad you have some misplaced distrust that precludes you from sorting good information from bad information.

Even the great Swine flu hoax was proven to have been a money-making scheme by Big Pharma, since evidence has come out that the vaccine was in the works even before the particular strain had broken out in Mexico that Spring.

Ummmm, I wouldn't go so far as saying that the Great Swine Flu epidemic was deliberately staged by big pharma, but any VACCINES aimed at it wouldn't have done any good anyway. Zero. Zip. Zilch. Goose egg.

The virus mutated so quickly and so completely that scientists didn't stand a chance of keeping up with the variant strains. People were dying while the virus was mutating.

I think you are wrong on one point, SH123- Indy and Hotticket are BOTH here due to the influence of vaccines directly on themselves. they did not grow up in a vaccine-free vacuum unless they are from the Amazon rainforest or something. they could very well be alive today because of vaccines, yet they are willing to risk losing their kids... and the safety of their kids rests in large degree on the rest of us vaccinating our kids.

but it's okay- they know something we don't, right?

C.Rhodes 3.11

Wow- the ignorance is astounding. I work in an evolution lab an you are SO wrong. Antibiotics, especially when used incorrectly and excessively, creates "super-bugs"like MRSA by selecting for strains that have resistance. Therefore, when people actually get sick, there are less treatments for them available. Vaccines don't kill pathogens, they prevent infection. The only thing they can select for is strains not susceptible to the vaccine itself which you might as well not worry about if you don't want to get vaccinated. This does not increase virulence or limit treatments for those who actually have the pathogen however. If anything, it decreases the population of the pathogen do new mutations are less likely to occur.

Also, about their being many types of a pathogen like the viruses that cause the flu. That may be true (I don't know the actual number, just that there are only a handful of strains at any given time that are actually of concern), but to conclude therefore that vaccines against one are useless is ridiculous. It completely disregards that in a given year ONE strain will predominate and we can usually predict which one it will be (and even when they get it wrong it still prevents quite a bit of infection since the one predicted is at least the runner up).

It's like saying that you don't make your kids wear helmets while on their bike since there are many fatal injuries that a helmet won't prevent, even if head injuries are the leading cause of death in bike accidents.

Oh, but wait!!!!! Since we have "proven" that vaccines don't cause autism, everything is hunk-dory, right????

The sheeple will believe anything the media tells them. Even right down to the degeneration of our children.

I have two boys. They are NOT vaccinated. I will NOT put that s--t in their systems. Poison, indeed.

Let's actually look at another generation that grows up without experiencing the morbitity and mortality of a handful of horrific diseases that modern medicine has almost wiped out...moronic statements such as yours would be laughable were it not so unfortunate that behind your lack of basic critical thinking skills is an individual with the same voting power as more capable human beings.

Oh, really? Have you bothered to look at the rates of measles before the 1950's? Ever seen the rates during the prior one hundred years graphed out on paper? Would you like to know that measles was almost gone BEFORE the vaccine ever even came out??

Nope, you haven't. And you probably don't care. Fine.

Oh, and "modern medicine" has created more death than Mother Nature ever has, by proportion.

There is a reason why most diseases children are "immunized" against are called "childhood diseases". It's because the vast majority of the time these children get the disease, work it out naturally, and move on adulthood just fine. Of course some kids become maimed or killed. That's life. It's tragic, yes, and my statements shouldn't be misconstrued to believe otherwise. But is destroying the immunity of an entire society better off?

And another thing, "modern medicine" has not 'almost wiped out' these diseases. It has simply kept them at bay. The closest we got to was smallpox, and now that is on the rise again.

But you go ahead SH123 and believe whatever the media and government tell you. Don't bother to do any research into the matter, just simply believe.....just believe........just..........there, now go to sleep........

Actually you are referring to measles death rates, not measles cases. Death rates across the spectrum declined going into 20th century - due to modern medicine and antibiotics. Really, modern medicine has created more death than mother nature. That is one, not able to be proved, but would more than likely be false, by a landslide. Pun not intended.

Yes many kids would be able to fight off childhood illnesses that are being vaccinated, but many would die. And if your statement about destroying the immunity of an entire society wasn't just another one of your lies, then sure I could see where I might question vaccinations a little bit more. The real truth is, (not the one that the government and media tells me, but of the sort that I have studied personally and under the professorship of numerous MDs and PHDs) that vaccines positively affect immunity and have by and large allowed a handful of diseases to have just a fraction of the destructive power they one had.

How is it that by accepting the research of thousands of scientific papers and studies, all backed by empirical evidence, that I am the one that is misguided? As opposed to hanging on to literally a handful of poorly designed studies that just happen to strike your conspiracy fancy.

Yes, death rates declined immensely as well. But so did the sheer number of cases...BEFORE the vaccine was even available. Oh, and maybe I'm stupid, but can you please explain how antibiotics (your words) saved the lives of kids who were infected by a virus?

And yes, I would like to have a comparison between deaths caused by natural illness (I'm obviously not referring to disasters, just infections) versus iatrogenic deaths caused by modern medicines. C'mon, are you seriously ignoring the 180,000 deaths caused by medicines every year? And keep in mind, these are only the deaths that were appropriately reported to have been directly linked to 'proper' prescribing by MDs. Who knows how many have been killed but weren't properly reported (Vioxx, anyone?)

As for poorly designed studies, I didn't specifically state ANY studies thus far...and neither have you. If you want to debate me, then stop putting words in my mouth (or in this case, keyboard).

My entire premise about societal immunity is based upon the notion of unintended consequences. YOU do NOT know what negative effects these vaccines are possibly doing (I'll concede some conjecture, here) to our collective immune systems long-term, nor can YOU provide any rationale, much less peer-reviewed literature (and void of interest conflicts), to explain any causation of autistic disorders, especially as it flies in the face of countless case histories and anecdotal evidence. I'll also conceded that Wakefield screwed the pooch by promoting false info......alright......but why is it that the rates of autism have followed the rates of vaccine schedules almost lockstep? And if it is just due to better diagnosis of autisitic disorders, then where are all the presumed autistic people in their 60's and older??? SO, SH123, I have many reasons why I feel the way I do towards vaccines.

And you can paint me as a 'conspiracy theorist' all you want, would you like to know what I think of your worldviews?

My words were death rates across the spectrum decreased - due to modern medicine and antibiotics. Across the spectrum usually implies something broad, I was referring to health and illness in general.

Ok, here's one comparison of illness vs iatrogenic deaths. Your 180,000 number vs. the leading cause of death in the U.S. from 2007, Heart Disease - over 600,000. Just a slightly bigger number. Except I'll wait for your response about how big pharma is behind heart disease.

So if you're not even going off of studies, then it's only off of anecdotal evidence or theory. That's even worse.

Yes, conspiracy theorist is a valid definition for one who holds certain views despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

Heart disease is largely linked to diet and exercise (or lack thereof), especially the lack of Vit. B4 and K2. It is NOT a naturally occurring disease state from infectious causation. You would do better to stick with the topic at hand.

Oh, you might wanna go look up the biochemical pathway of Vioxx, and how it leads to pericardial inflammation.

I never said I wasn't going by any studies at all, I simply said that you falsely attributed 'poor studies' to me when I hadn't even specifically stated any to begin with! Reading comprehension goes a long way, pal.

Here....I'll make it easier for you....

http://pain-topics.org/pdf/AHA_NSAID_Statement_Feb07.pdf

Thank you. I have not denied side effects of medications. It has been a pleasure conversing with you. Clearly we both have our views and aren't going to persuade the other of anything. A losing proposition for both of us. I'm sure we will cross paths again. Enjoy your evening.

I had 2 younger siblings that died of measles in the late 50's. My brother was never able to have children because of the mumps he contracted as a child. Do really want to go back to the way it used to be? Sign your waivers, don't get your kids vaccinated, it is your choice. Keep them out of public schools. There are children who CANNOT be vaccinated. So the disease that will make yours a sick may kill someone else's. But you just keep thinking only about yourself and your family...for you that is all that matters.

I had the mumps in the 60's and and had 6 children. My 4th. daughter can not be vaccinated because of adverse reaction caused by vaccines. I was put in a coma for three days as a child because of a vaccine.

I will keep thinkingabout myself and my family because all adhering to conformity gets you is slavery, sickness and death.

Social responsibility?............do not make me laugh. That is as idiotic as the vaccine theory. Brainwashing via propaganda, there is your social responsibility.

That was your experience. Mine was the opposite. There are always going to be people who react badly to vaccines and other meds (my daughter is allergic to penicillin as is my husband). As I said it is your choice and in your case a necessity.

jennie mccarthy had NOTHING to do with my 20+yrs of researching vaccines... thank you very much.

Liz, how do you KNOW your kids are fine?

Just because they did not have an immediate negative reaction to a round of vaccines (as many parents HAVE experienced, mind you), how can you just assume there has been no harm done? What about the potential long term effects? Modern science has NO CLUE what the potential effects are. In fact, anytime any research is done that contradicts mainstream literature on the subject, it is immediately dismissed by government and the AMA. Go figure.

Besides, you can knock McCarthy all you want. But have you ever talked to a mother who's child became retarded or autistic in the days following a vaccination? You might want to......

oh but that's ok, jenny mccarthy's kid just needed more fiber and probiotics so he could poop out the autism. he's fine now, didn't you hear?

How so? Did good ole Jenny teach him PCR with confirmatory SDS-PAGE and Western Blotting with nitrocellulose to capture and measure out the cute little bugger amplicons???????

whoop looks like i've turned off the science-y parts now. don't feel like arguing no mo'.

(and you know that SDS-PAGE and western blots are for protein right? personally i woulda gone the PCR route then just thrown the amplified bits into an agarose gel.)

what about informed choice? are you against that too? shouldn't parents get to choose what to put in their own bodies as well as their childrens?

some of us also think that the parents should be held accountable if their little germ factories become sick or hospitalized from a preventable disease for which a vaccine is offered and refused.

Well, dblhelix, in your world I guess it would be fine to force your gestapo-like BS on people for making informed choices about their own children.

Question: Do we get to hold you and the government accountable every time a child gets sick from the vaccine itself?

i have to say that's the first time i've been compared to the nazi secret police. first time for everything i suppose.

ok, i'll see if i can get the attitude right. the problem is that the informed choices by parents usually means "did you hear what debbie down the street said about the MMR!?" and not any of the actual science. i've seen it before; mention interleukins, cytokines, the differences between a CD8 vs a CD4 T cell, herd immunity, adjuvants, etc. and you know what happens? a blank stare and visibly glazed over eyes followed by "but debbie said!" the epidemiology of the area they inhabit or the diseases common to it? probably not. would they apply that info to their kids and and make the informed decision based on the epidemiology? probably not. fact is, people don't like making the informed decisions and would rather the answer be presented in black and white for every variable. doesn't work that way.

and no, you wouldn't hold the government accountable. they're your friggen kids, the government wouldn't care if you don't vaccinate and even less if you did. it's not the government screaming to get your kids their shots, it's us scientists that have seen the bugs work. there's this thing that if given to your newborn could save save her from drowning in her own fluids from the whoop. give the kid the shot, and miraculously she doesn't die. don't give her the shot and the whole drowning thing could happen. ever seen that happen before? i have, it's even worse when the parents are saying "but we didn't even get her vaccinated!" evidence of an informed decision, right there.

i've seen it before; mention interleukins, cytokines, the differences between a CD8 vs a CD4 T cell, herd immunity, adjuvants, etc. and you know what happens? a blank stare and visibly glazed over eyes followed by "but debbie said!"

Sort of like the blank stares you get when someone opposing your view explains that CD4+ T cells are the helper cells and CD8+ are the cytotoxic T cells involved in graft rejection? What about the Ts (suppressor) cells? We know NOTHING??? Get real.

But dblhelix, you're assuming everyone else is not as informed as you are. And you're also assuming that everyone else sees the data the same way as you have. There is data that contradicts the current status quo. Are you sure you have been exposed to ALL known information?

what i'm saying is that it'd be better if informed decision included more of those details. if it involved researching the shot, the prevalence of the disease in that area (or beyond depending if you wanted to travel abroad), and even just googling at the least to look up the things on that insert you don't know, that'd be nice. but just going off anecdotal evidence... that's tricky.

i'll admit i'm guarding my stick in the ground, it's clear what i think, but it's never been made clear to me why the other camp thinks what they think about the shots. so please, i'll step off the defensive if someone can just tell me why it's so much more of a better idea from the other side's view.

do you really expect anyone to accept as unbiased an article from a website called VACTRUTH.COM? PLEASE! how about some actual science rather than hysteria?

Corporate Science would not believe the truth about vaccines if every child died directly after vaccination.

There is a difference between science and man made science. Science is part of understanding nature and how things work and man made science is egotism trying to destroy science by their authoritarian opinions and forced outcome data.

There are exceptions to everything, it doesn't mean that MOST people around babies should get this vaccine. Care should be taken with all medication and treatment, but that doesn't meant the recommendation for the vast majority should change.