Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,433 Year: 3,690/9,624 Month: 561/974 Week: 174/276 Day: 14/34 Hour: 0/7


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Childhood Vaccinations – Necessary or Overkill?
nator
Member (Idle past 2191 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 76 of 327 (365329)
11-22-2006 8:09 AM
Reply to: Message 74 by purpledawn
11-22-2006 7:26 AM


Re: Great thread, very eloquent
Are you interested in starting a thread on the likely effectiveness of castor oil packs, PD?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by purpledawn, posted 11-22-2006 7:26 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by purpledawn, posted 11-22-2006 3:40 PM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2191 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 77 of 327 (365333)
11-22-2006 8:22 AM
Reply to: Message 74 by purpledawn
11-22-2006 7:26 AM


Quack book
quote:
I use the book "Prescription for Nutritional Healing" by Phyllis A Balch. It gives good explanations of diseases, with known causes and how it affects the body. Then it gives suggested remedies and life style change recommendations.
Quackwatch lists this book under their "nonreccommended" list.
Clicking any link brings up a page containing a description of the condition plus information about causes and treatments taken from the second edition of Prescription for Natural Healing, by James F. Balch, Jr., MD, and Phyllis A. Balch, CNC [4] James F. Balch, Jr., is a urologist who practiced in Indiana but is no longer listed as licensed in the state medical board's directory, so I assume that he now devotes his time to writing. In a predecessor book published in 1987, he described how Phyllis had counseled hundreds of his patients and used hair analysis and cytotoxic testing as a guide [5]. (Both are quack tests [6,7].) During the mid-1990s, James was also associated with A. Glenn Braswell, a mail-order retailer who flooded the country with brochures (some accompanied by letters under Balch's name) for dubious herbal and supplement products [8].
The book's back cover describes Phyllis Balch as "a certified nutritional consultant who received her certification from the American Association of Nutritional Consultants and has been a leading nutritional consultant for almost two decades." She also founded "Good Things Naturally,"a health-food store in Greenfield, Indiana. AANC is a thoroughly disreputable organization whose only membership requirement has been payment of a $50 fee and whose "CNC" designation is based on passage of an open-book examination based mainly on the contents of quacky books [9]
About 450 of the book's 608 pages provide an A-to-Z compendium of health problems and the authors' lists of nutrients that are "essential," "very important," "important, "or "helpful." Some lists contain more than thirty items. The authors recommend daily dosages of 3,000 mg or more of vitamin C for everybody ("for maintaining good health") and higher doses (up to 20,000 mg/day "under a doctor's supervision") for dozens of problems. They also recommend daily dosages of emulsified vitamin A ranging from 50,000 to 100,000 IU for many conditions and 75,000 IU for "maintaining healthy eyes." [4:258] The vitamin C dosages are high enough to produce severe diarrhea; and the vitamin A dosages are high enough to cause liver injury. From a scientific viewpoint, the book's advice is loony from beginning to end, but the dietary supplement industry loves it because it enables retailers to refer their customers to an "authoritative" source of advice for nearly every problem the customer may have [10].
In 1993, posing as potential customers, FDA agents visited health food stores in 20 communities and asked (a) "What do you sell to help high blood pressure?" (b) "Do you have anything to help fight infection or help my immune system?" and (c) "Do you have anything that works on cancer?" In response to about 20% of the queries, the retailer looked up the answer in Prescription for Nutritional Healing or advised the agent to refer to or purchase it [11].
Edited by schrafinator, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by purpledawn, posted 11-22-2006 7:26 AM purpledawn has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 78 by nator, posted 11-22-2006 8:37 AM nator has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2191 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 78 of 327 (365334)
11-22-2006 8:37 AM
Reply to: Message 77 by nator
11-22-2006 8:22 AM


Re: Quack book
PD, I know that you have said that you don't reject modern science or medicine, but I really do think you need to become much more selective in what you accept as true regarding health claims.
It would serve you well to get a better grounding in basic human physiology, as well.
But as far as knowing what websites and books to believe regarding medical and health claims, I give you "How to Spot a Quacky Web Site" by Dr. Stephen Barrett.
The best way to avoid being quacked is to reject quackery's promoters. Each item listed below signifies that a Web site is not a trustworthy information source. The hyperlinks will take you to articles on Quackwatch that explain why. The same criteria can be used to identify untrustworthy books, talk-show guests, etc.
General Characteristics
Any site used to market herbs or dietary supplements. Although some are useful, I do not believe it is possible to sell them profitably without deception, which typically includes:
(a) lack of full disclosure of relevant facts, (b) promotion or sale of products that lack a rational use, and/or (c) failure to provide advice indicating who should not use the products. During more than 35 years of watching the health marketplace, I have never encountered a seller who did not do at least one of these three things.
Any site used to market or promote homeopathic products. No such products have been proven effective.
Any site that generally promotes "alternative," "complementary," and/or "integrative" methods. There are more than a thousand such methods. The vast majority are worthless.
Any site that promotes "nontoxic," "natural," "holistic," or "miraculous" treatments.
False Statements about Nutrition:
Everyone should take vitamins.
Vitamins are effective against stress.
Taking vitamins makes people more energetic.
Organic foods are safer and/or more nutritious than ordinary foods.
Losing weight is easy.
Special diets can cure cancer
Diet is the principal cause of hyperactivity.
False Statements about "Alternative" Methods:
Acupuncture is effective against a long list of diseases.
Chelation therapy is an effective substitute for bypass surgery
Chiropractic treatment is effective against a large number of diseases
Herbs are generally superior to prescription drugs.
Homeopathic products are effective remedies.
Prayer can influence the course of disease.
Spines should be checked and adjusted regularly by a chiropractor.
False Statements about Other Issues:
Fluoridation is dangerous.
Immunizations are dangerous or do more harm than good.
Amalgam ("silver") filings should be removed because they make people sick.
All teeth that have had root-canal therapy should be removed because they make people sick.
Edited by schrafinator, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by nator, posted 11-22-2006 8:22 AM nator has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by purpledawn, posted 11-22-2006 8:59 AM nator has replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3479 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 79 of 327 (365338)
11-22-2006 8:59 AM
Reply to: Message 78 by nator
11-22-2006 8:37 AM


Re: Quack book
I agree with most of what he's said, but I do take issue with the comments on vitamins and organic foods. I find it funny that he doesn't consider organic foods to be ordinary food.
Better grounding in basic human physiology, what a concept!
But that is another topic and I don't have time right now to prepare a thread opener.

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by nator, posted 11-22-2006 8:37 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by nator, posted 11-22-2006 7:01 PM purpledawn has not replied

Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 306 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 80 of 327 (365339)
11-22-2006 9:01 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by Buzsaw
11-20-2006 7:36 PM


Re: autism-sorry, long
Although government “experts” continue to maintain there is no link between autism and vaccines, they offer no alternative theory for the skyrocketing number of cases.
Doesn't he know that when scientists can't explain something, that means that goddidit?
God or extraterrestrials.
In any case, it can't be caused by the measles vaccine. If it was, then the numbers would have risen sharply with the introduction of the vaccine, and then plateaued at the new, higher, level. If the number of cases of autism is "skyrocketing", the measles vaccine can't be the cause.
As a devout Pastafarian, I blame it on the decline in the number of pirates.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Buzsaw, posted 11-20-2006 7:36 PM Buzsaw has not replied

Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3933 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 81 of 327 (365346)
11-22-2006 9:16 AM
Reply to: Message 74 by purpledawn
11-22-2006 7:26 AM


Hep B on birthday.
Such as, why is it necessary to give a newborn baby a Hepatitis B vaccination right out of the womb? Supposedly the only means of contracting the disease for an infant is through it's mother who can be tested for the disease. Is it really necessary for all infants to have the vaccine?
I am a big proponent of vaccination and I DID opt out of the birthday Hep B vaccination for our son. It is completely unnecessary if the Hep B status of the mother is known. As it turns out, my wife both was vaccinated for Hep B and had a negative Hep B test a month before he was born. They give babies another Hep B shot at their two month visit anyway regardless if they had one at the hospital.
I found out the reason for why they administer the Hep B vaccine for newborns. As it turns out, the mortality rate for newborns who contract Hep B from their mothers is so high that in most cases it is stupid NOT to take that precaution especially for mothers with unknown Hep B status. Since we had very good prenatal care, we didn't have to worry about it and in fact the pediatrician at the hospital gave us kudos for our decision saying that the only reason it is there is for a catchall for the worst case situation.

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by purpledawn, posted 11-22-2006 7:26 AM purpledawn has not replied

nwr
Member
Posts: 6409
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 82 of 327 (365349)
11-22-2006 9:22 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by Buzsaw
11-20-2006 7:36 PM


Re: autism-sorry, long
Buzsaw quoted from (DV) Pringle: Get Mercury Out of Vaccines -- NOW! :
Although government “experts” continue to maintain there is no link between autism and vaccines, they offer no alternative theory for the skyrocketing number of cases.
Here is an alternative explanation that is being offered. To be fair to Buzsaw's source, this is more recent that the source web page so the author of that page might well have been unaware of the research going on.

Just say no to McCain 2008; he abandoned principle when he caved on habeus corpus

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Buzsaw, posted 11-20-2006 7:36 PM Buzsaw has not replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3479 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 83 of 327 (365438)
11-22-2006 3:04 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by nwr
11-21-2006 3:15 PM


Re: Natural Path
quote:
I don't understand why you would be worried by them.
I never said I was worried by them.
I was tagged a creationist and a biology hater because I asked Buz how he managed to not have his children vaccinated.
My point is that there are people who have issues and they aren't automatically creationists or biology haters.
I don't feel that anyone should be forced to blindly accept what is put into their body and questioning doesn't make someone a science hater.
There are issues and some aren't satisfied with the answers.
Is our destiny to become dependent on vaccines because we crowd to many people together? We avoid the natural way to keep population down.
NOTE: By processed foods (and that may not be the correct term for what I'm avoiding, but my husband knows what I mean and I don't know what else to call it.) I mean those foods that have preservatives, HFC, sugar, artifical sweetners, white flour, etc. We try to stick to what we consider real food.
Edited by purpledawn, : NOTE

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by nwr, posted 11-21-2006 3:15 PM nwr has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-22-2006 3:19 PM purpledawn has replied
 Message 86 by Wounded King, posted 11-22-2006 5:19 PM purpledawn has not replied

Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 306 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 84 of 327 (365441)
11-22-2006 3:19 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by purpledawn
11-22-2006 3:04 PM


I apologized twice, and if it still rankles, I'll apologize again. I was wrong and I'm sorry, OK?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by purpledawn, posted 11-22-2006 3:04 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by purpledawn, posted 11-23-2006 4:16 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3479 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 85 of 327 (365448)
11-22-2006 3:40 PM
Reply to: Message 76 by nator
11-22-2006 8:09 AM


Re: Great thread, very eloquent
quote:
Are you interested in starting a thread on the likely effectiveness of castor oil packs, PD?
Not sure what I could add if you want hard facts. I only have my experience and what I've read (if I can find the info again.) in books. I would join in, but I don't know that I can prove anything to your safisfaction.

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by nator, posted 11-22-2006 8:09 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by nator, posted 11-22-2006 7:07 PM purpledawn has not replied

Wounded King
Member
Posts: 4149
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 86 of 327 (365475)
11-22-2006 5:19 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by purpledawn
11-22-2006 3:04 PM


Re: Natural Path
We avoid the natural way to keep population down.
This is certainly true. The natural way to keep the population down is to have a huge proportion of them die. Personally I'm all for avoiding that.
TTFN,
WK

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by purpledawn, posted 11-22-2006 3:04 PM purpledawn has not replied

Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 87 of 327 (365484)
11-22-2006 6:02 PM
Reply to: Message 73 by nator
11-21-2006 9:56 PM


Re: Great thread, very eloquent
But Juggs, using herbs IS pharmacology. They are drugs.
Synthetic drugs is what I'm referring to, not botanicals.
If herbs weren't drugs, then taking them wouldn't have any effect. That's WHY people take them, isn't it? That's why they are called "medicinal herbs", right?
Yes, but I'm saying that if a natural remedy exists, why take synthetic drugs that have many different side effects? If that remedy doesn't remedy you, then, sure, try another avenue.
We literally do not know what chemicals many of these herbs contain, and some of them have hundreds and even thousands of compounds. Some might be useful, some inert, and some toxic.
Let me give your a for-instance: Many people by lozenges to help with sore throats when they could just gargle some salt water or a lemon/honey/water solution. And anything could become toxic in excess. For instance, alot of people take Vitamin A supplements. I think we'd all agree that vitamin A is good for you in a proper dosage, but you can consume toxic levels.
Curare is natural. Arsenic is natural. Cyanide is natural.
So are vitamins. Some things in nature can kill you and others can heal you. That really bears no reflection on the matter. Neither of those have any medicinal purpose to them. Codeine does, but it kills people too.

Faith is not a pathetic sentiment, but robust, vigorous confidence built on the fact that God is holy love. You cannot see Him just now, you cannot fully understand what He's doing, but you know that you know Him." -Oswald Chambers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by nator, posted 11-21-2006 9:56 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by nator, posted 11-22-2006 7:30 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied
 Message 91 by Coragyps, posted 11-22-2006 9:05 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2191 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 88 of 327 (365493)
11-22-2006 7:01 PM
Reply to: Message 79 by purpledawn
11-22-2006 8:59 AM


Re: Quack book
quote:
I agree with most of what he's said, but I do take issue with the comments on vitamins and organic foods. I find it funny that he doesn't consider organic foods to be ordinary food.
Based upon what do you disagree with him?
Also, replace the word "ordinary" with "conventional" and you will, I think, understand his meaning.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by purpledawn, posted 11-22-2006 8:59 AM purpledawn has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2191 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 89 of 327 (365494)
11-22-2006 7:07 PM
Reply to: Message 85 by purpledawn
11-22-2006 3:40 PM


Re: Great thread, very eloquent
quote:
Not sure what I could add if you want hard facts. I only have my experience and what I've read (if I can find the info again.) in books. I would join in, but I don't know that I can prove anything to your safisfaction.
What I'm interested in is, given the lack of facts, why, and how you think it does what you think it does.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by purpledawn, posted 11-22-2006 3:40 PM purpledawn has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2191 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 90 of 327 (365499)
11-22-2006 7:30 PM
Reply to: Message 87 by Hyroglyphx
11-22-2006 6:02 PM


Re: Great thread, very eloquent
But Juggs, using herbs IS pharmacology. They are drugs.
quote:
Synthetic drugs is what I'm referring to, not botanicals.
I know.
Both synthetics and botanicals are drugs.
The difference being that synthetic drugs are isolated, purified, consistently-potent, and regulated by law, and botanical drugs are not.
If herbs weren't drugs, then taking them wouldn't have any effect. That's WHY people take them, isn't it? That's why they are called "medicinal herbs", right?
quote:
Yes, but I'm saying that if a natural remedy exists, why take synthetic drugs that have many different side effects?
What makes you think that botanical drugs as a group don't have many different side effects, even more than synthetics?
Like I said, herbs in their unrefined state can have hundreds, even thousands of compounds in them, all of which have potential to cause side effects. The problem is, we don't know the chemical makeup of many, many botanical drugs since the manufacurers are not required to find out and tell you.
Every drug has side effects, synthetic and botanical alike. Taking any drug, synthetic or botanical, is a benefit/risk equation, and since the compounds in synthetics are 1) tested before release to market, and 2) isolated, while botanicals are not tested and there may be thousands of other unknown compounds in any given botanical, which one sounds safer to you?
quote:
If that remedy doesn't remedy you, then, sure, try another avenue.
But why would you use a botanical when you don't even know what's in it, what potentcy it is, what side effects it might have?
We literally do not know what chemicals many of these herbs contain, and some of them have hundreds and even thousands of compounds. Some might be useful, some inert, and some toxic.
quote:
Let me give your a for-instance: Many people by lozenges to help with sore throats when they could just gargle some salt water or a lemon/honey/water solution. And anything could become toxic in excess. For instance, alot of people take Vitamin A supplements. I think we'd all agree that vitamin A is good for you in a proper dosage, but you can consume toxic levels.
I don't understand how this comment addresses the argument I presented.
I agree that Vitamin A can be toxic in high levels.
The point is, we don't even know what is in most of the medicinal herbs on the market, let alone know how toxic any of the compounds might be, either alone or in combination with other drugs or foods.
Curare is natural. Arsenic is natural. Cyanide is natural.
quote:
So are vitamins. Some things in nature can kill you and others can heal you.
And do you want to be the one to find out which ones kill you by ingesting something before it is shown to be safe and effective?
quote:
That really bears no reflection on the matter. Neither of those have any medicinal purpose to them. Codeine does, but it kills people too.
The point I was making is that the tone of your previous post implied that botanical drugs were somehow more "healthy", safe, and have fewer side effects than synthetics simply because they were "natural" (i.e. not synthetic).
That is simply not true, and is a myth propagated by the multi-billion dollar "nutritional supplement" industry.
When potent natural substances are discovered, drug companies try to isolate and synthesize the active chemical in order to provide a reliable supply. They also attempt to make derivatives that are more potent, more predictable, and have fewer side effects. In the case of digitalis, derivatives provide a spectrum of speed and duration of action. Digitalis leaf is almost never used today because its effects are less predictable. Many herbs contain hundreds or even thousands of chemicals that have not been completely cataloged. Some of these chemicals may turn out to be useful as therapeutic agents, but others could well prove toxic.

"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool."- Richard Feynman
"Science is like a blabbermouth who ruins a movie by telling you how it ends! Well I say there are some things we don't want to know! Important things!"
- Ned Flanders

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by Hyroglyphx, posted 11-22-2006 6:02 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 93 by purpledawn, posted 11-23-2006 4:46 AM nator has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024