I'm sure you've seen the stories. I certainly have. I've been emailed, anonymously told on this blog, and I also read the news. It would be hard to miss. Wondering what I'm talking about? Take a look at this cnn.com news story:
Measles Outbreak May be Linked to Vaccine Fears
In this article, they take many shots at families who choose not to vaccinate. Those families, families like my own, are having the finger pointed at them because of the current measles outbreaks (which, in the big scheme of things, there is NO epidemic). Funny thing is, if you read the very first sentence in this news story you see something a little (ok, a lot) contradictory. Let me show you:
"Measles cases in the U.S. are at the highest level in more than a decade, with nearly half of those involving children whose parents rejected vaccination, health officials reported Thursday."
Did you catch what I caught when you read the opening sentence? If not, let me show you what caught my eye.
"...with nearly half of those involving children who parents rejected vaccination..."
Nearly half. Not the total group, not half, nearly half.
Webster's dictionary defines "nearly" this way: 1: in a close manner or relationship, 2 a: almost but not quite.
So, based on Webster's definition and the article on cnn.com, almost, but not quite half of the measles cases came from unvaccinated children. NOT QUITE HALF. So that means that the other half, or actually slightly more than half, came from VACCINATED children. Funny how the news and the CDC can spin things, huh?
Seems to me, the CDC should be examining why the half who were vaccinated got the measles. The story even goes on to say that some of the unvaccinated children were too young for the vaccine. That is why they had not received it. See again, the families who choose not to vaccinate are being blamed for those numbers too. Somehow they got grouped in with the rest of us. Fair? No. Accurate? No.
Later, the article flips and gives a higher number for unvaccinated children. Honestly, the article is filled with inconsistencies. Regardless, I'm going to share with you what I shared with a friend who sent me this article:
While I certainly wouldn't like to see my boys get the measles, I trust that they would survive if they got it. Based on the facts that they are healthy, well-adjusted, and have good nutritional habits, I think they would get through measles and would then develop a life long immunity to it, just as they will chicken pox.
Like any parent who loves their children, I hate to see my kids suffer. I would feel terrible for them if they were to contract measles; however, I am much more willing to watch them conquer the measles than to suffer a disabling side effect from the MMR vaccine.
Not only have I see a lot of research on the dangerous ingredients in the vaccine, I have also read testimony after testimony of parents who had totally normal children pre-vaccine, and literally hours after receiving the MMR vaccine, they had zombies.
Also, as a Christian, I absolutely disagree with the choice of using human diploid cells from aborted fetal tissues in the vaccine (as listed in the MMR vaccine packet). Abortion is wrong, so why is it ok to use aborted fetal tissues? Because they're dead anyway? It's wrong. I don't want my children to have any part of that.
In the MMR pamphlet, there is a section under "Warnings":
They tell anyone currently with or who has a family history of convulsions, cerebral injury, or any other condition in which stress due to fever should be avoided.
My aunt has epilesy and convulsions.
The pamphlet also says, "As for any vaccine, vaccination with the MMR II may not result in protection in 100% of vaccines."
So it may not protect my kids from an illness that nearly all kids in America would be able to recover from, but may cause permanent disability? For me and our family, we find the risk to outweigh the benefits.
As for this big measles outbreak among the unvaccinated, history has shown many outbreaks among the vaccinated. However, with more parents opting out of vaccines, of course the CDC wants to highlight today's unvaccinated spreading measles. Of course.
Here is a super informative article that highlights even more information on the MMR vaccine. Check it out:
The MMR Vaccine: What the Manufacturer's Insert Tells Us
The CNN article also says:
"Pediatricians are frustrated, saying they are having to spend more time convincing parents that the shot is safe."
"This year, we certainly have had parents asking more questions," said Dr. Ari Brown, an Austin, Texas, physician who is a spokeswoman for the American Academy of Pediatrics."
I'm sorry, what? Pediatricians are frustrated because they are having to calm parents fears? They are frustrated because they're having to answer questions about the safety of vaccines? Because parents want to be informed BEFORE they put potentially dangerous chemicals into their most precious cargo, their children? Really, pediatricians? That is frustrating to you? For those parents who are questioning your child's healthcare, I APPLAUD you! You are doing your job as a parent. Keep up the good work! Oh, and there are great pediatricians out there who are eager to answer the questions you have. I encourage you to find one of those. Don't settle for someone who gets irritated because you want to know what you're doing to your kids before you do it.
Here are more interesting articles:
Just How Protected Against the Measles Are We Anyway?Measles Vaccines Undeniably Linked to AutismFinnish Study Attempts to Confirm MMR Safety