Cervical Cancer Injections for Young Girls

[Leanne]

I'm quoting WHO data from Japan

[crayola]

I'm quoting WHO data from Japan

Can you provide a reference or even better a link to the figures?

Are you sure you're not getting confused with death rates from complications which may arise from measles in a very small number of cases?

[toodiemac]

I'm quoting WHO data from Japan

So are you saying that the measles death rate in unvaccinated children in Japan is 10-20%? That seems incredible given that the death rate in the UK is 0.02%. Could you post a link to your source please?

If the information is correct (and I'm not saying it isn't) then there must be something very strange going on there - especially if 25-50% of survivors are left permanently brain damaged in Japan, whereas the figure for that in the UK seems to be negligible.

Anyway, a link would be great

[Leanne]

Could you post a link to your source please?

Can you provide a reference or even better a link to the figures?

Links like everyone else has posted

[toodiemac]

And where are you basing your justifications for this statement? How are you qualified to comment? The statement you made is not true and you give no justification for it. To make a statement like that and not back it up with hard fact shows lack of knowledge. It's very easy to talk the talk but without hard evidence to back it up your argument looks rather thin. Just because you can shout louder doesn't make you correct - you need to back up your statements with justification to be taken seriously in a scientific debate.

Shame I am educated, know my own mind and can argue my point from an informed view point

You said yourself earlier (directed at another poster) that to be taken seriously in a scientific debate you should back up a statement with hard fact - not to do so shows a "lack of knowledge". You said that you are making an "informed" point.

I'm not saying your information is wrong, I am just really interested on what on earth is going on in Japan to make measles such a devastating, deadly disease compared with the rest of the developed world.

The figures on death rates which I posted can be easily found in any google search, but I can't find any info on your figures, that's why I'm asking for a link.

[crayola]

Just as an aside, if the fears were justified think of this - the rate of autism is said to be 1 in 10,000 but the death rate from measles in unvaccinated children is 10-20% with 25-50% of survivors having permanent brain damage. Would you rather have a small chance of an autistic child or a large chance of a dead/brain damaged child? At the moment measles epidemics are being kept at bay by the numbers of vaccinated children - if vaccination levels fall to 75% there is an increase risk of an epidemic in the unvaccinated (including pregnant mothers who were born before the start of the vaccination drive).

Since nobody else has posted references let me do it. The following quote comes from the Japanese Journal of Intensive Care Medicine.

Recently, the number of adult measles has increased in Japan. Acute encephalitis occurs in 0.5% of adult measles and is a life threatening complication. Its mortality rate is 10% to 20% and after effect rate is 25% to 50%.

10% of 0.5% is 0.05%. I think we have our explanation.

[toodiemac]

Ah, thanks for that Crayola. In other words the information Leanne posted about the measles death rates in children was totally incorrect!

Why post incorrect statements as fact in a thread covering such an emotive subject, especially while at the same time challenging other posters to back up their comments with "hard evidence" in order that they be "taken seriously"?

Hmmmmmm, I suppose anybody can make a mistake............... but that was quite a big mistake considering the poster is "educated" and has a medical background.

[DOCTOR]

Can I suggest that anyone with any worries or fears regarding this vaccine they should contact their GP.

Their GP is someone whom they can go to talk things over with and ask for their proffessional advice.

This is the same GP most of us will head to when we are unwell and take their diagnosis and perscription so trust them on vaccines as well.

As I have always said our good friend google throws up so much information its very difficult to know what information to take on board and what to disregard.

DOCTOR

[tootz]

Ive Had All My Cervical Cancer Jabs, I Got A Letter Giving Me Information On It And Advising Me To Make An Appointment With The Nurse To Discuss It, Then I Got It Done.

[Stavro]

You were right in a previous post. She's quoting certain third-world countries which I agree is a bit naughty and not relevant to the current discussion.

Which third world countries?

[Stavro]

Ah, thanks for that Crayola. In other words the information Leanne posted about the measles death rates in children was totally incorrect!

Why post incorrect statements as fact in a thread covering such an emotive subject, especially while at the same time challenging other posters to back up their comments with "hard evidence" in order that they be "taken seriously"?

Hmmmmmm, I suppose anybody can make a mistake............... but that was quite a big mistake considering the poster is "educated" and has a medical background.

Yes, I agree entirely. It's also worth mentioning that this was the information that Crayola was praising as being so informative.

[_Ju_]

The fact is, that no matter how tried or innocuous and type of medicine is, there will always be unpredictable and unpreventable idiosincratic reactions. The choice you make as individuals is weather the risk outweighs the benefit. This you do with the help of the doctor you trust. If you trust google more than your doctor, then you need your head examined. If you think that any health organization is going to spend a fortune on a preventative measure whose benefits are a scam then you are a conspiracy theorist. You are welcome to your theories, but if just one person reads this thread, and instead of consulting with their doctor and family decide not to vaccinate their child and that child grows into an adult with cancer then that would be a tragedy just as great as the rare idiosincratic reactions to vaccination or the young women that die every year from cervical cancer.

[router]

here is a fine reason not to have it. Our daughter recieved hers today without our blessing, but she wanted it, and she could have been a statistic like this young girl. Her whole life ended.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8279656.stm

[Stavro]

here is a fine reason not to have it. Our daughter recieved hers today without our blessing, but she wanted it, and she could have been a statistic like this young girl. Her whole life ended.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8279656.stm

This is terrible.

Notice how dizziness and nausea amongst other pupils have to be described in the article as "mild symptoms."

As for Ju's opinion, that does not merit reply. People who make their decisions based upon unbiased, quality opinions do not need their head examined.

[toodiemac]

I don't think that anybody would make their decision based solely on this thread to be honest, but if it encourages somebody to think long and hard before making a decision then surely that can only be a good thing?

If it encourages somebody to google and then present their concerns to a doctor, then surely that can only be a good thing too? Gone are the days when doctors had a God-like status, people want to take responsibility for their own health more and more nowadays.

I have, in the past, raised concerns with health professionals which they knew nothing about and they then had to go and find out the answers - nobody is an expert on absolutely every drug and vaccine going. For example, often the chemist knows a lot more about drug side effects and interactions than the doctor does. Have you never been at the doctor and had him look up a book to find a drug and to find out if it is suitable? Of course they can't be expected to know everything about everything, medicine is constantly evolving and they don't actually do the research, they just pass on the information that they themselves have been given.

It's not a case of trusting Google more than trusting the doctor, it's about doing your own research and finding out as much as you possibly can, weighing up the risks, talking, listening to others (including health professionals of course), hearing both sides of the argument. After all, vaccines can have side effects that last for life, which nobody would dispute, so surely it's worth making a TRULY informed decision and not just assuming it must be okay because ..................

[chaz]

I don't think that anybody would make their decision based solely on this thread to be honest, but if it encourages somebody to think long and hard before making a decision then surely that can only be a good thing?

If it encourages somebody to google and then present their concerns to a doctor, then surely that can only be a good thing too? Gone are the days when doctors had a God-like status, people want to take responsibility for their own health more and more nowadays.

I have, in the past, raised concerns with health professionals which they knew nothing about and they then had to go and find out the answers - nobody is an expert on absolutely every drug and vaccine going. For example, often the chemist knows a lot more about drug side effects and interactions than the doctor does. Have you never been at the doctor and had him look up a book to find a drug and to find out if it is suitable? Of course they can't be expected to know everything about everything, medicine is constantly evolving and they don't actually do the research, they just pass on the information that they themselves have been given.

It's not a case of trusting Google more than trusting the doctor, it's about doing your own research and finding out as much as you possibly can, weighing up the risks, talking, listening to others (including health professionals of course), hearing both sides of the argument. After all, vaccines can have side effects that last for life, which nobody would dispute, so surely it's worth making a TRULY informed decision and not just assuming it must be okay because ..................

Well said

[squidge]

Who doesnt think long and hard about EVERY medical procedure their child undergoes. You weigh up the risks and make your decision after discussing it with people you trust. That may be Doctors or other health professionals or your family and friends or somebody else. Anyone who thinks that any procedure is without risk is fooling themselves.

Some children may indeed have adverse reactions to vaccinations and If any parents believes that the MMR triggered their child's autism I wont be saying they are wrong. But you make a decision based on best evidence available and you cross your fingers. Nothing, not only medical things but arranging babysitters, letting your child go out in the car with his pals, trying your baby with peanut butter for the first time, letting your wee one go to the shop by themselves - nothing is without risk. We can never get a cast iron guarantee and i am surprised that people seem to expect one.

What i do find annoying is when people who hold an informed and clearly well researched opinion on subjects like these dont give a hoot what the laymen amongst us feel when the information they are trying to impart is clouded by petty bickering and sniping and point scoring. It doesnt help

[DOCTOR]

I don't think that anybody would make their decision based solely on this thread to be honest, but if it encourages somebody to think long and hard before making a decision then surely that can only be a good thing?

If it encourages somebody to google and then present their concerns to a doctor, then surely that can only be a good thing too? Gone are the days when doctors had a God-like status, people want to take responsibility for their own health more and more nowadays.

I have, in the past, raised concerns with health professionals which they knew nothing about and they then had to go and find out the answers - nobody is an expert on absolutely every drug and vaccine going. For example, often the chemist knows a lot more about drug side effects and interactions than the doctor does. Have you never been at the doctor and had him look up a book to find a drug and to find out if it is suitable? Of course they can't be expected to know everything about everything, medicine is constantly evolving and they don't actually do the research, they just pass on the information that they themselves have been given.

It's not a case of trusting Google more than trusting the doctor, it's about doing your own research and finding out as much as you possibly can, weighing up the risks, talking, listening to others (including health professionals of course), hearing both sides of the argument. After all, vaccines can have side effects that last for life, which nobody would dispute, so surely it's worth making a TRULY informed decision and not just assuming it must be okay because ..................

A very valid argument. The personal research done on the google also includes the majority of wrong information.It means the facts and figures can be twisted by the posters.

No matter what research you do you would not grasp the background knowledge, experience gained over years, specialised training and decision making ability that a fully trained Doctor has.

Treating human beings as patients and giving them a valid advice is the job of a physician.It is a two way process where both parties have faith and trust in each other.

All the medicines, investigations ( tests ) and vaccines have significant side effects. In case of vaccines, these are developed to prevent a fatal disease.

All the people who are offered vaccine will not develop the disease ( if the vaccine is not given ) it is for the minority of the people who would develop fatal disease in absence of a vaccine unfortunately there is no crystal ball to tell who may or may not need this vaccine.

The longevity in the present era is due to better vaccination and better health care facilities.

If you are to fully rewire your house no matter what amount of information you google,in the end of the day you would need a trained electrician to do it properly. If not then it would be a cowboys job. If someone wants to make this kind of decision regarding their own health then that's their own cowboys decision.

The doctor looking in the book is not always looking up the drug, he is looking at the dose according to the wieght and the kidney state of the patient and other possible factors including age, sex, etc.

[Stavro]

I came onto (a thread that was merged with) this thread because someone asked for opinions regarding young girls having a vaccination against cervical cancer.

After following the whole thread for a while, it does seem remarkably evident to me that those posters who have researched the vaccination issue are far more reasonable and better informed than those who promote the government line.

My own answer to the original question therefore remains the same: do not blindly take the "government knows what's best for your child" line, but research and, most importantly, think for yourselves.

I would never take any vaccination, but each individual is different. One thing that you will discover, though, is that when you seriously question the medical establishment/business, you will almost certainly experience a hostile reaction to not only the vaccination but also your daring to question what they want to pump into you!

[Stavro]

The longevity in the present era is due to better vaccination and better health care facilities.

No, it is not. It is due to better hygiene and easier access to varied and nutritional food.