To Vaccinate Or Not To Vaccinate, That Is The Question

LiveFit99 · Oct 27, 2019

On 10/27/2019 at 8:15 AM, seraphimid said:
I think the underdeveloped immune systems of infants are especially sensitive to severe immune reactions by their MHC complex due to the animal DNA used in vaccines.

How are you able to categorize a vaccine immune response as "severe", compared to any other immune response?

People seem to think that vaccines are some crazy, unnatural invention. All vaccines do is present an antigen to the immune system. The exact same antigens that come from the environment. I never understood why someone thinks catching the actual measles is somehow a less "severe" immune response than one initiated by a vaccine.

Which feels worse, the body's response to the flu shot, or the response to the real flu? The cytokines and prostaglandins released by the immunes system (the response) causes those negative symptoms. Measuring these would show a more severe response to the natural pathogen.

The infant's immune system is bombarded by the natural environment from the first minute outside of the uterus. Every bit of food eaten, every breath that has bacteria on dust particles, anything that touches a mucous membrane...eyes, nose, mouth, lungs, is going to interact with the immune system.

**LibraSunCNM, BSN, MSN, CNM** · Oct 27, 2019

On 10/27/2019 at 1:14 PM, seraphimid said:
Common sense research. If transverse myelitis, an autoimmune disorder triggered by vaccines and viral infections, has been established to have a specific etiology, it is due time for the scientific community to undertake research into all autoimmune disorders and any possible connection between injecting a human or animal with foreign species DNA and the following inflammatory cascade. That’s just plain and simple logic. You’re asking me for evidence of research that in the current climate of religious like faith in vaccine efficacy wouldn’t even be acceptable to perform. The research can’t be done because no one is delaying any vaccines due to the overwhelming promotion and acceptance of them as unanimously safe and effective! So when you think of better questions to ask me, I may have better answers. If you are at all genuinely interested in the connection rather than simply trying to prove me wrong in order to remain faithful to your own bias, you can use the internet to search for studies on autoimmunity, neurological disorders, and viral triggers. Here let me start the search for you with a landmark study about autism and measles. Can you show me the literature saying every single individual who HAS received vaccines doesn’t have allergies or an autoimmune type illness?

I'm not sure that it will be super productive to respond to you given how extraordinarily defensive you became in your reply, but I will try.

I simply asked why you have come to the conclusion that delaying vaccines will solve the problem you described above, when there is nothing to back up that theory. I feel the same way when people make statements like "We all know that it's better for your immune system to fight off an illness itself rather than rely on a vaccine" as a rationale for taking their kids to chicken pox parties---says who? According to what? It's like ideas get formulated out of thin air that have no basis in reality. Why do you think it's ok to delay vaccines but not scrap them all together? I'm just asking for more information about how you came to your conclusions, so we can have a discussion.

As for your last question, it is patently ridiculous. Of course I cannot prove that and I never claimed I can. As I have stated previously, I acknowledge the fact that vaccines sometimes cause adverse reactions. Most of the time reactions are minor, sometimes the reactions are severe. I still feel, based on the state of the current science, that the benefits far outweigh the risks.

seraphimid · Oct 27, 2019

On 10/27/2019 at 2:05 PM, LiveFit99 said:
How are you able to categorize a vaccine immune response as "severe", compared to any other immune response?
People seem to think that vaccines are some crazy, unnatural invention. All vaccines do is present an antigen to the immune system. The exact same antigens that come from the environment. I never understood why someone thinks catching the actual measles is somehow a less "severe" immune response than one initiated by a vaccine.
Which feels worse, the body's response to the flu shot, or the response to the real flu? The cytokines and prostaglandins released by the immunes system (the response) causes those negative symptoms.
The infant's immune system is bombarded by the natural environment from the first minute outside of the uterus. Every bit of food eaten, every breath that has bacteria on dust particles, anything that touches a mucous membrane...eyes, nose, mouth, lungs, is going to interact with the immune system.

I don’t think it’s fair to compare monkey line DNA to dust when considering immunological responses in the immature immune systems of infants. Vaccines present foreign species DNA, leading to the formation of antiDNA antigens, which cross reactively create anti cell surface antigens, which characterizes autoimmunity. The following study on SLE explores antiDNA antigens in one autoimmune disorder. When applying this to infant immunity, the less differentiated a cell, the more susceptible it is to cross reactivity

https://www.pnas.org/content/84/9/2956

seraphimid · Oct 27, 2019

26 minutes ago, LibraSunCNM said:
I'm not sure that it will be super productive to respond to you given how extraordinarily defensive you became in your reply, but I will try.
I simply asked why you have come to the conclusion that delaying vaccines will solve the problem you described above, when there is nothing to back up that theory. I feel the same way when people make statements like "We all know that it's better for your immune system to fight off an illness itself rather than rely on a vaccine" as a rationale for taking their kids to chicken pox parties---says who? According to what? It's like ideas get formulated out of thin air that have no basis in reality. Why do you think it's ok to delay vaccines but not scrap them all together? I'm just asking for more information about how you came to your conclusions, so we can have a discussion.
As for your last question, it is patently ridiculous. Of course I cannot prove that and I never claimed I can. As I have stated previously, I acknowledge the fact that vaccines sometimes cause adverse reactions. Most of the time reactions are minor, sometimes the reactions are severe. I still feel, based on the state of the current science, that the benefits far outweigh the risks.

I’m sorry if you think I was being ultra defensive. I was responding to you stating I had nothing to base my ideas on, which you wrote in your initial reply to me. I do, in fact, have something to base my ideas on, which is the scientific literature on autoimmunity, viral infections, neurodegeneration, and antiDNA antigen research and their link to vaccination. I believe science should always exist within a realm of inquiry which is why I am so interested in this topic. I would much rather vaccines be completely safe and efficacious for everyone. Post-vaccinal encephalitis is more than 100 years old as a diagnosis but people are arguing in 2019 about if vaccines can even cause autoimmunity. To me that is unscientific and dangerous.

To answer your question regarding how I came to my conclusion about delayed vaccination: there is no conclusive evidence on the maturity of the MHC complex or when cells are more or less susceptible to crossreactivity from foreign DNA that I could find, but I do suspect that immature immune cells and stem cells are the most susceptible, which would in turn make infants the most vulnerable to developing autoimmunity post vaccination.

seraphimid · Oct 27, 2019

On 10/27/2019 at 2:11 PM, LibraSunCNM said:
I'm not sure that it will be super productive to respond to you given how extraordinarily defensive you became in your reply, but I will try.
I simply asked why you have come to the conclusion that delaying vaccines will solve the problem you described above, when there is nothing to back up that theory. I feel the same way when people make statements like "We all know that it's better for your immune system to fight off an illness itself rather than rely on a vaccine" as a rationale for taking their kids to chicken pox parties---says who? According to what? It's like ideas get formulated out of thin air that have no basis in reality. Why do you think it's ok to delay vaccines but not scrap them all together? I'm just asking for more information about how you came to your conclusions, so we can have a discussion.
As for your last question, it is patently ridiculous. Of course I cannot prove that and I never claimed I can. As I have stated previously, I acknowledge the fact that vaccines sometimes cause adverse reactions. Most of the time reactions are minor, sometimes the reactions are severe. I still feel, based on the state of the current science, that the benefits far outweigh the risks.

The study found that infant tissues had more newly formed T cells than effector and memory cells throughout the body compared with adults. The highest concentrations of effector and memory cells were found exclusively in the infants’ lungs and small intestine, which are often the first point of entry for pathogens. In addition, children under age two had more regulatory T cells in their tissues and lower levels of cytokines—substances that fight infection by causing inflammation—than adults.

“These results suggest that we may be able to enhance the effectiveness of the vaccines we give during infancy and early childhood if they are targeted to the lungs and small intestine, rather than the bloodstream,” said Dr. Farber. “Furthermore, the increased number of regulatory T cells during infancy may prevent a young child’s immune system from overreacting to all newly introduced antigens. This could account for recent findings that early exposure to potential allergens, such as peanuts, may be associated with decreased allergic response compared with introducing them later in childhood.”

https://www.cuimc.columbia.edu/news/immune-system-study-reveals-how-infants-respond-infections

and a timely and worthy read:

https://www.globalresearch.ca/japan-no-vaccine-mandates-no-mmr-vaccine-healthier-children/5675901

**LibraSunCNM, BSN, MSN, CNM** · Oct 28, 2019

On 10/27/2019 at 3:38 PM, seraphimid said:
The study found that infant tissues had more newly formed T cells than effector and memory cells throughout the body compared with adults. The highest concentrations of effector and memory cells were found exclusively in the infants’ lungs and small intestine, which are often the first point of entry for pathogens. In addition, children under age two had more regulatory T cells in their tissues and lower levels of cytokines—substances that fight infection by causing inflammation—than adults.
“These results suggest that we may be able to enhance the effectiveness of the vaccines we give during infancy and early childhood if they are targeted to the lungs and small intestine, rather than the bloodstream,” said Dr. Farber. “Furthermore, the increased number of regulatory T cells during infancy may prevent a young child’s immune system from overreacting to all newly introduced antigens. This could account for recent findings that early exposure to potential allergens, such as peanuts, may be associated with decreased allergic response compared with introducing them later in childhood.”
https://www.cuimc.columbia.edu/news/immune-system-study-reveals-how-infants-respond-infections
and a timely and worthy read:
https://www.globalresearch.ca/japan-no-vaccine-mandates-no-mmr-vaccine-healthier-children/5675901

An "article" from the Center for Research on Globalization? Really? That is a known conspiracy theory website that publishes straight garbage.

https://thewalrus.ca/why-google-has-a-responsibility-to-fight-fake-news/

This conversation is obviously fruitless if you believe such nonsense.

osceteacher · Oct 28, 2019

That globalresearch article is the utter worst of causation=/=correlation fallacies. A terrible article that anyone should be embarrassed to link.

Its also notoriously anti-semetic, pseudoscientifc, and a haven for conspiracy nutjobs. You'll get very short shrift if you think thats an article/site worth linking to.

My favourite article from them:

North Korea, a Land of Human Achievement, Love and Joy

seraphimid · Oct 28, 2019

13 hours ago, LibraSunCNM said:
An "article" from the Center for Research on Globalization? Really? That is a known conspiracy theory website that publishes straight garbage.
https://thewalrus.ca/why-google-has-a-responsibility-to-fight-fake-news/
This conversation is obviously fruitless if you believe such nonsense.

There is nothing to “believe” in besides the statistics regarding the not vaccinating infants and pregnant women. Also, I find it interesting you have nothing to say about any of my previous thoughts. I linked the global research article because it illustrates an example of humanistic medicine, letting doctors vaccinate children based on knowing that child’s health history rather than having a one size fits all vaccine schedule. Has it never occurred to you that ever other substance an infant receives is titrated by weight except for a vaccine? Would you give an infant an adult dose of Tylenol?
the problem with having conversations about this topic is people are automatically dismissed as conspiratorial even if what they are saying is logical. Speaks to the level and quality of thought happening in most people’s heads. You asked me why I was an advocate for delayed or altered vaccination schedules: The infants immune system responds to pathogens differently than a child of two would, as that article from Columbia.edu illustrates regarding T cell responses to pathogens in the blood stream vs in the small intestine and lungs - infants have a more inflammatory response to a pathogen.

seraphimid · Oct 28, 2019

On 10/28/2019 at 6:49 AM, osceteacher said:
That globalresearch article is the utter worst of causation=/=correlation fallacies. A terrible article that anyone should be embarrassed to link.
Its also notoriously anti-semetic, pseudoscientifc, and a haven for conspiracy nutjobs. You'll get very short shrift if you think thats an article/site worth linking to.
My favourite article from them:

If you truly care about the plight of Jewish people murdered under the Nazi regime (which used “medicine” to begin its murder squads) you would first learn how to spell Semitic I imagine? Furthermore, an anti Semitic website that reminds us all of the Nuremberg code and it’s use in medical consent? Funny...and let’s not too quicklyforget the role our very profession played

nursej22, MSN, RN · Oct 28, 2019

8 minutes ago, seraphimid said:
There is nothing to “believe” in besides the statistics regarding the not vaccinating infants and pregnant women. Also, I find it interesting you have nothing to say about any of my previous thoughts. I linked the global research article because it illustrates an example of humanistic medicine, letting doctors vaccinate children based on knowing that child’s health history rather than having a one size fits all vaccine schedule. Has it never occurred to you that ever other substance an infant receives is titrated by weight except for a vaccine? Would you give an infant an adult dose of Tylenol?
the problem with having conversations about this topic is people are automatically dismissed as conspiratorial even if what they are saying is logical. Speaks to the level and quality of thought happening in most people’s heads.

Actually, some vaccines are dosed for children, that's why there is is DTap for babies and toddlers, and Tdap for school age kids. Pediatric Hep A is 1/2 the dose of Adult Hep A. Sanofi has made pediatric dose Fluzone for years.

Correlating infant mortality rate to vaccine rate is ludicrous. Tell the people of Madagascar who have more than 1200 children die this year from measles about how much healthier they are not to have MMR vaccine.

seraphimid · Oct 28, 2019

3 minutes ago, nursej22 said:
Actually, some vaccines are dosed for children, that's why there is is DTap for babies and toddlers, and Tdap for school age kids. Pediatric Hep A is 1/2 the dose of Adult Hep A. Sanofi has made pediatric dose Fluzone for years.
Correlating infant mortality rate to vaccine rate is ludicrous. Tell the people of Madagascar who have more than 1200 children die this year from measles about how much healthier they are not to have MMR vaccine.

Thank you for telling me that about TDaP, glad to learn something new.
If you scroll through the links I posted you will see the problem with the MMR vaccine from a 2005 article and also the proposition to give an MR vaccine and make mumps “recommended” but it seems like people here love remaining crusaders against “anti vaxxers” and continue calling biological science a conspiracy theory regardless of any alternative someone proposes. If you are going to reply to me directly the least you can do is know what I have been proposing.

nursej22, MSN, RN · Oct 28, 2019

On 10/28/2019 at 11:34 AM, seraphimid said:
If you scroll through the links I posted you will see the problem with the MMR vaccine from a 2005 article and also the proposition to give an MR vaccine and make mumps “recommended” but it seems like people here love remaining crusaders against “anti vaxxers” and continue calling biological science a conspiracy theory regardless of any alternative someone proposes. If you are going to reply to me directly the least you can do is know what I have been proposing.

I am not sure which article you mean, but if it is this one https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/16512356/?i=6&from=/15546805/related

it speaks to thimerosal , which was removed from single dose childhood vaccines in 2001, thimerosal was never in MMR. https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/thimerosal/index.html

If I am speaking to the wrong article, it is easier to review if you cite the author(s) and date, or source. And I have to believe that there is more research done in 14 years.