It is a contentious issue and a can of worms I had no desire to open.
It is a rabbit hole I did not want to go down.
Until I read THIS.
I'll wait for you to read the post, read our exchanged comments under it, and come back.
So the main outstanding issue it would seem is that Ms Alliance said I well knew that her "this is the only country in the world" sentence was about the "spurious" link between autism and MMR.
Well it doesn't take more than 90 seconds on Google to establish this is NOT the case.
The UK is NOT the only country in the world.
Take a look at a recent court ruling in Italy...
... that apparently will reignite the issue and has already been discussed in The Independent and the Daily Mail. It is recent, being from June 2012!!! The parents were awarded £140,000 (in Euros) and COULD be awarded a further £800k...
The Mail Online shockingly states:
The number of autism cases has soared over the past four decades — at the last count researchers found one in 64 British children have some kind of autistic condition — and there has been widespread speculation over the cause of this widespread curse on so many families. In the Eighties, only four in every 10,000 children showed any signs of autism.The thing is I am not judgmental of people who choose to vaccinate, but apparently people who believe in attachment parenting are. Read this.
In some ways I am into all that (attachment parenting). I breastfed Aaron for 13 months. I used a Moby Wrap for a year and a half as I believe in baby wearing, and we co-sleep. I have seen the many and varied benefits of all 3 but I do not ram my beliefs down people's throats. I wouldn't treat people in the way outlined in the link just given.
What saddened me about Ms Alliance's post is the use of so much emotive language, that I found insulting and felt like a call to action for me. This first saw me write some comments and tweets. Even once I decided this post was necessary I knew it would take a minimum of 8 hours and I knew it was best not written in haste.
My tweets resulted in me receiving several tweets back, despite my tweets not being addressed to @MsAlliance.
Ms Alliance says "all the anti-vaxxers and homeopaths on Twitter" above, despite the fact that I was the only person to tweet her about the subject - she lost me on that one.
I'd love to copy and paste all the insulting unnecessary words used in Ms Alliance's post but hopefully you have read it and noticed them. Surely she knew that would provoke a response, yet seems shocked when she got just that.
I would never use those words if I didn't expect a reaction.
But what got me more was the emotive words that her friend used everytime she tweeted me. Emotive words I was alert to, considering that was what GOT ME about the original post in the first place!
Some of the above screen shots overlap, but I had to do that so that they were all included as some threads did not contain all tweets. Like the time I sent 3 tweets in a row to Number1ScumMum.
Instead of remaining civil and realising it is possible to have a healthy debate without falling out or resorting to being abusive, they both immediately blocked me on twitter, both at the EXACT point when I made a valid point. Their silence to my valid points was deafening!
I am just glad that I did not stoop to their level. And as I stated, it IS my right as a blogger to write this right to reply post.
My comments on the post were written in haste and I clearly needed to write something more comprehensive given that she said I did not address all the issues.
So while I am tolerant of others' choices, I wasn't awarded the same civil courtesy. No need for words like hysterical, self-important, troll, and passive aggressive.
But maybe it was meant to be that my cage is sufficiently rattled that I write this post...?
Another issue Ms Alliance seems to be passionate about is the HPV vaccine, even going so far as to mention Bill Gates in her opening sentence. I find this surprising given this, this and this.
I know there are always at the very least, two sides to every story, so I also include this.
Ms Alliance also seemed to object to the fact that I was talking about one Doctor when she was talking about another despite me never mentioning Wakefield. If you really must challenge the support you believe Doctor Wakefield has not - in your opinion - received, I give you this website as just one starting point, which may send you on to many others...
Ms Alliance, you provided a link to this, yet I suggest you read and fully digest the notes that are at the bottom of it.
Also Ms Alliance, the font changes many times during your post - do you realise that plagiarism is frowned upon in the blogging community?
This is very interesting. As is this.
I really urge all who read this post to read this, the conclusion of which is:
ConclusionThis study should put to rest the notion that "greening" vaccines, that is removing or withholding vaccines' normal toxic additives, would make the childhood vaccination schedule of close to 40 vaccinations by 18 months of age more agreeable.
The Kobe animal trials demonstrated how autoimmune reactions were created as a consequence of repeated antigen only inoculations with long enough breaks between each injection to allow complete recoveries.
Autoimmune diseases have increased in quantity and variety as childhood vaccination schedules increased and more vaccines were made available for naive recipients. Even infectious diseases that vaccines are supposed to immunize against have appeared among the vaccinated more often than publicly admitted.
The very basis of creating immunity with even "greened" vaccinations is worse than false, it is actually unhealthy.
This is one of many videos that can be watched on You Tube:
This is particularly worrying given that the UK is to use the Gardasil vaccine from September this year, 2012.
Okay, back to MMR, even the WHO admits:
Severe measles is more likely among poorly nourished young children, especially those with insufficient vitamin A, or whose immune systems have been weakened by HIV/AIDS or other diseases. Source: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs286/en/
What we are really talking about is:
When the benefit of vaccination is perceived to be lower than the risk, many people refuse immunization. Source
What makes it difficult is when those risks are under-reported but thank God for You Tube and the internet in general.
Some vaccines may be necessary but what is worrying is the extent of the schedule, the age (and weight) at which they are administered and the way in which they are grouped together.One comment which did not get passed moderation on Ms Alliance's post was a comment that included a link to this, so I include it here.
The sad thing is, that each time there is a public outcry, the vaccinations are adapted, which in my opinion validates people's concerns, even though they were poo poo'd at the time. A case in point is that Natural News talked about Thimerosalin in 2005 and it is now removed or reduced to trace amounts. The FDA even admits the concerns about it here (June 2012). But notice the time lag: 2005 to 2012. So how many children suffer before the voices become loud enough to force changes through! More info on Thimerosalin here.
Sorry but I don't want to be experimented on. I don't want to give my son something that is later found to be harmful.
This post is not meant to influence your opinion. I am neither a Doctor nor an expert.
The choice about vaccinations is a weighty one and very individual. You know you can blame the state if vaccinating goes wrong, as has been the case with the Italy court ruling, but you stand alone with your choice when you decide not to vaccinate. But when your gut instinct speaks to you it is hard to ignore.
I'll leave you to have a read of this as a lot of these Mums make the arguments way better than me.