Saw this on Facebook,what is your thoughts?

MOST HELPFUL POSTS

Jenni - posted on 11/16/2011

5,928

34

393

Oh yes, and it's an internet survey... what's to stop me from filling out the survey 8 times and claiming to have 8 "vaccine-free" (notice term) children who are all in great health. Then he compares that data of 8000 (vaccine-free) participants to national health of children in the US under the assumption that close to 100% of children in the US are "fully vaccinated".



This study is full of holes. If we (just average individuals) can read it one time through and find this many discrepancies. That says a lot about the study.

Johnny - posted on 11/15/2011

8,686

26

322

I think that using the the term "facts" may be stretching in this case.

Jenni - posted on 11/16/2011

5,928

34

393

I like the use of quotations when referring to "credible" studies done by non-profit or government health organizations with political conflicts.... yes, and a study via a vaccine injury website, by a homeopathic doctor has no conflict of interest or bias. Nah, he's not going into this with the intention to PROVE his anti-vaccine agenda.



Just another one of the typical pseudoscience, anti-vaccine-speak, vague studies, trying to draw a line between correlation and causation based on the opinions of highly biased participants....



Oh and the vaccine rate in the US is NOT close to 100%... it's 90% for the MMR, which basic math leads to 1/10 children not being vaccinated MMR. Quite a large number when you think about it nationally. So way to "skew" those statistics. The rate of other vaccines are even less:



"Nationally, vaccination coverage increased in 2010 compared with 2009 for ≥1 dose of measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine (MMR), from 90.0% to 91.5%; ≥4 doses of pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV), from 80.4% to 83.3%; the birth dose of hepatitis B vaccine (HepB), from 60.8% to 64.1%; ≥2 doses of hepatitis A vaccine (HepA), from 46.6% to 49.7%; rotavirus vaccine, from 43.9% to 59.2%; and the full series of Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) vaccine, from 54.8% to 66.8%."



According to the CDC: http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml...

Janice - posted on 11/15/2011

1,890

18

63

Wow! That is quite interesting. Although, in the chart one of the diseases listed is Herpes which makes me pause at credibility. So if you are vaccinated you are more likely to develop allergies, asthma, ect, but you cant just develop herpes so that bit doesn't make sense.
I'm quite interested to see what happens with this new info.

10 Comments

View replies by

Rosie - posted on 11/16/2011

8,657

30

321

lol, other than it's obvious lack of anything scientific, it does nothing to prove that vaccines do or don't work against the diseases they are being vaccinated against.

Tinker1987 - posted on 11/15/2011

1,144

5

10

yeah the herpes things was a red flag for me to,you dont just get that lol. but yeah interesting read...

Sharlene - posted on 11/15/2011

3,896

241

825

That was really interesting facts ,especially for us parents and new mums and dads.

Join Circle of Moms

Sign up for Circle of Moms and be a part of this community! Membership is just one click away.

Join Circle of Moms