Would you trust the h1n1 shot after this...

Lol sorry kandykinz I can only access journals at work and these days I'm working from home loads because of ms. When I am in I'll be mad busy doing actual work! I miss not having access at home. The uni I work at changed their login system to save money so I need to set up a whole virtual network for my uni account and the account is a bit wrong anyway since I was last on leave. Too much trouble! Maybe when I'm done growing babies I'll be up to the task again!

Okay.... Maybe I'll go through them tonight.

Hopefully they won't take away my access anytime soon though... Since I'm on a leave of absence technically they're suppose to cut me off until I officially go back.... so far they haven't done so.... so maybe they're system missed me! Maybe I'll have access from home forever!!! Wouldn't that be super awesome :thumbup: Damn! I'm a geek!!!!
 
Not a geek, if I ever end up disconnected I'll by my own Athens password if needs be! Would be cheaper I bet though to get membership as alumni at my old uni and use their e-journals.

I don't know anything about the socioeconomic link, just speculating on possible reasons for it. You're right if course that those who are very severely autistic won't be having jobs, there is probably also a broad possibility that their lack of social interactions will mean they also won't pass on their genes. In the UK we have no segregation in the way you've speculated for the US but there are still gross differences in health between our different socioeconomic groups. In the UK I could certainly see under achieving, essentially autistic, children completely slipping through the net and their families assuming they are stupid or whatever or just not really even thinking anything of it. In fact a BF of my friend is quite strongly autistic and he was never diagnosed (he's 35) and is only now self-learning about his condition and how to manage this new relationship. Also my nephew despite a firm diagnosis from his specialist doctor has still not got the statement of special educational needs that instructs the school to provide appropriate support for him. And that is after at least 4 years of long hard battle at his primary school.

I think I mostly believe that autism is essentially congenital with a strong but no doubt varying degree of inheritance. This wouldn't rule out environmental influences during pregnancy.
 
The socio-economic link is just an anomoloy in the statistics. I'm not sure if its universal to all areas. It has not been substantiated as a cause-effect as far as seeking a diagnosis and treatment yet... they keep trying to find that link but the data contradicts that hypothesis.

It might be that people on the ASD spectrum are more likely to end up with a child with a more severe form of the ASD disorders. So that by having a slight case yourself, you're genetically at risk for having a child with a severe form. Like the gene is there, and anything can set it off and make the disorder manifest in a worse condition (whether its combination with your spouse's genes or something environmental).

And as someone stated earlier, its possible that we are seeing nurmerous causes that happen to manifest with similar symptoms... so that SOME cases the chid may be born with it... some may be due to outside influence (diet, environment etc) that triggers in some people etc.

My brother's disorder just got reclassed in a group of other disorders that have similar types of brain damage in the same area of the brain.... they used to be listed separately but they just grouped them together in the past year or two for some reason.

I have a sleep disorder that is similar to narcolepsy, only I'm not classified as narcoleptic because I don't have the 'cause' that qualifies you for that official diagnosis (incidentally, its an excessive amount of time spent in REM sleep which exhausts you... I had totally normal sleep patters but was still exhausted/sleepy/able to nap several times in the day). Strangely, I have a touch of a disorder called cataplexy which is strongly linked to narcolepsy.. and isn't supposed to be linked to my type of sleep disorder... though there are a handful of people that have the cataplexy but are the 'other' kind of narcoleptic. The treatment is the same for all of us regardless... control the symptoms. Same medications too.
 
Medicine is an extremely imperfect science. We people are just too damn different and complicated!

Thanks for being good natured about my peer review lesson lisaf, just shows I'll do the science thing to whoever if I think something isn't quite right! And you're right of course that papers also need to stand the test of time, or rather replication.
 
I will be getting the flu shot this winter as I will have a newborn and would hate to get her sick if I got the flu. I tend to have a very strong immune system, but I wouldn't want to risk it because of my LO. I also had the H1N1 nasal spray version of the vaccine last winter while pregnant and obviously am fine, but I was also in school for early childhood education and it was recommended that people working with young children get the shot.
 
I have been reading the autism study s with interest. The computer scientist thing is VERY Very interesting!!! xx
 
coming into this late, but 1- My heart goes out to the young woman and her family, I cannot imagine.... and 2- I choose not to vaccinate against h1n1 because to me, it is such a new illness, and that a vaccine was available SO quickly makes me question it's safety (no time for testing... unless it was planned??????)... i work in a hospital and it was recommended I get vaccinated, but instead I wll take other precauations... I have all my reg. vaccines and gt my kids vaccinated on schedule, but yearly things like this, we have no interest in.
 
wow, old thread, but as far as it being a 'new' illness... its just another strain of flu.
Every single flu vaccine each year is a targeted towards the strains they expect to be prevalent. Every single year's exact flu formula is 'untested' ... h1n1 is not any more untested than every year's vaccine.

What you take of that information is up to you, but the flu vaccine is given to the most vulnerable in the population every year and beyond the normal range of bad reactions that happen with any vaccine, I don't think they've been any less safe or more dangerous than other vaccines.
 
ohh haha i didnt even see how old it was, i just clicke and away i went............ :)
 
This is an old thread but kinda relevant as theres been a swine flu outbreak up in blackpool UK just last week, a 9 year old girl is in intensive care :(

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/...-latest-victim-epidemic-sweeping-Britain.html
 
I was going to say similar lisaf, this strain was prevalent in I think it was the '50s. Not new, just making a comeback.
 
I do not have the energy to put up PROPERLY RESEARCHED evidence right now as I'm not on my own computer so don't have it to hand, but sorry - those of you who are claiming the H1N1 vaccine is "dangerous" obviously don't know how to decipher internet bullshit from legitimate studies and research. ONE correlation does not "prove" that the vaccine WAS TO BLAME. Did they exclude autoimmune disorders? Allergy? Psychosomatic paralysis? I doubt it. Some wannabe hotshot doctor is most likely trying to get his name "out there" by making an unproven link between H1N1 vaccine and this "paralysis".

Paracetamol can cause thrombocytopenia and leukopenia in extremely rare cases, would you refuse a paracetamol if you had a fever so high you were risking a miscarriage? Doubt it.

I had the H1N1 vaccine after being ill with probable swine flu for over a month from 5 weeks pregnant. My body temperature was so high I had to take 4g of paracetamol (acetaminophen for U.S) to bring my temp down because the hospital doc had said the risk of miscarriage with such a high temp was very high. After I was over the "probably" swine flu, or "possible" normal flu I was given the MIXED vaccine containing 2 strains of seasonal flu vaccine AND swine flu. Not paralysed, now 10.5 weeks pregnant, no more paranoia about flu.

Can i just say something? PLEASE don't discourage people from getting these vaccines UNTIL YOU HAVE EVIDENCE FROM RANDOMISED/DOUBLE-BLIND TRIALS. Not daft you-tube testimonials or "organic-health" websites trying to promote their own products.

The death toll from swine flu in the UK this winter has hit 50. A number (i forget exact number) of those were PREGNANT. There are millions of babies if not more who are now BORN AND HEALTHY to mothers who, last year at this time, were pregnant and had the vaccine. If there was a correlation between H1N1 vacc and birth defects, miscarriage, and whatever else these daft sites are claiming, it would have been picked up by now and the vaccine banned.

Sorry if this sounds like i'm ranting. I genuinely just don't want to hear of anyone on this forum - or anywhere else for that matter, dying because of vaccine-fear induced in them by ill-informed websites and youtube videos. And I'm not talking crap, I have a degree in toxicology & Immunology - while I don't claim to be an "expert" in the slightest, it does give me the ability to distinguish from unproven crap and reliable evidence.
 
Weebooda, do you remember a drug given from 1938 to 1971 called diethylstilboestrol (DES)? It was a drug given to pregnant women to prevent miscarriage. In 1950, a double-blind study was performed that found the drug increased the likelihood of certain cancers in the unborn babies, and also caused rare vaginal tumours. Despite this study, the drug was still given to young girls to prevent growth in puberty, fearing girls would be "too tall". In 1971, it was discovered that the unborn babies of DES mothers were born with severe infertility issues, and developed these rare vaginal tumours. This is when the drug was finally pulled off the shelves.

The point here is, this drug, in its first few years, was deemed completely safe, and 30 years later was found to be toxic and harmful. The mothers who took it were fine, their babies were born appearing to be healthy, but it had debilitating long-term effects.

33 years of this drug...how many cancers could have been prevented? How many of these girls could have avoided those vaginal tumours? How many of these women could have had babies on their own if not for the harmful effects on their uteruses and ovaries? 33 years is a VERY LONG TIME.

This is just one example of a drug thought to be safe but proven years later to have harmful long-term effects. Can you, I, anyone here, or any of the researchers or creators of the swine flu vaccine say with 100% certainty that this vaccine is 100% safe and does not have long-term effects not yet known? No. No one can, and until long-term research is done, I, personally, do not feel this vaccine is safe. I'm not against the vaccine, I just do not trust it right now.

On the other hand, your post is quite offensive. To assume and throw out there that every one of us who will not get the vaccine are trying to push others not to get it is downright uncalled for. YOU, my friend, are the one pushing TO get it. Do not accuse us of doing wrong and doing harm when you are doing the exact thing you're telling us not to do.

You need to read the posts again. I am the mother of a 4 year old girl who was born perfectly healthy. The same week that she had her first vaccine, her brain stopped growing. White matter in her brain is disappearing and we cannot figure out why. We know there is a possibility that she was vaccine-injured. Because of this, I did VERY THOROUGH RESEARCH, beyond your internet reads, pertaining to the ingredients, the effectiveness, the safety, etc of the vaccines given to our children. I have spoken with multiple doctors, whether they be pediatricians, or neurologists or geneticists. Every single one of them agrees there's a possibility of my daughter's condition being a reaction to a vaccine. We can't get our little girl back. We have to watch as this debilitating condition eats away at her brain, and will eventually likely take her life. ALL of her specialists have told us to avoid vaccines for our future children and to stop vaccinating our daughter until we know for sure.

For you to try and tell me that I'm shoving my opinions down others throats and trying to scare them into not getting the vaccine is highly offensive and rude. I have done nothing of the sort, but here you are, scaremongering these poor women, just like the media, into getting it. Way to be a hypocrite.

You should meet my college instructor's sister. She had the vaccine in her first trimester and gave birth to a little boy who was born with such severe allergies, he couldn't even have breastmilk. His bladder and kidneys were deformed. He lived for 63 days on sugar water before he passed away. He didn't have a chance at life. Recent studies have shown that women who receive the vaccine in their first trimester have a higher risk of their babies being born with this severe allergy and organ deformities. Are you going to tell that mother who shares her story that she's scaremongering pregnant women into not getting the vaccine?

All I have done is share my daughter's story. I have shared my research. I have shared my opinion, which, darling, is FACT, that we do not know the long-term effects of this vaccine and therefore, we do not know if it is 100% completely safe. Until long-term research on our unborn and newborn babies has been completed in another 30 years, to make sure the vaccine didn't have long-term debilitating effects, to make sure it didn't increase the incident of certain cancers, or allergies, or diseases, until we know, 30 years from now that these precious babies we carry and love have not been harmed in any way, shape or form from this vaccine, I will continue to share my story, and I will continue to encourage women to research the vaccines and their options prior to being scared into getting it, by doctors, the media, and other women like you, and make their own decision based on their findings.

Next time, word it differently if you don't want to seem like a hypocrite and if you don't want to offend, because I guarantee, I won't be the only one to read your post and become offended by it.
 
Weebooda, do you remember a drug given from 1938 to 1971 called diethylstilboestrol (DES)? It was a drug given to pregnant women to prevent miscarriage. In 1950, a double-blind study was performed that found the drug increased the likelihood of certain cancers in the unborn babies, and also caused rare vaginal tumours. Despite this study, the drug was still given to young girls to prevent growth in puberty, fearing girls would be "too tall". In 1971, it was discovered that the unborn babies of DES mothers were born with severe infertility issues, and developed these rare vaginal tumours. This is when the drug was finally pulled off the shelves.

The point here is, this drug, in its first few years, was deemed completely safe, and 30 years later was found to be toxic and harmful. The mothers who took it were fine, their babies were born appearing to be healthy, but it had debilitating long-term effects.

33 years of this drug...how many cancers could have been prevented? How many of these girls could have avoided those vaginal tumours? How many of these women could have had babies on their own if not for the harmful effects on their uteruses and ovaries? 33 years is a VERY LONG TIME.

This is just one example of a drug thought to be safe but proven years later to have harmful long-term effects. Can you, I, anyone here, or any of the researchers or creators of the swine flu vaccine say with 100% certainty that this vaccine is 100% safe and does not have long-term effects not yet known? No. No one can, and until long-term research is done, I, personally, do not feel this vaccine is safe. I'm not against the vaccine, I just do not trust it right now.

On the other hand, your post is quite offensive. To assume and throw out there that every one of us who will not get the vaccine are trying to push others not to get it is downright uncalled for. YOU, my friend, are the one pushing TO get it. Do not accuse us of doing wrong and doing harm when you are doing the exact thing you're telling us not to do.

You need to read the posts again. I am the mother of a 4 year old girl who was born perfectly healthy. The same week that she had her first vaccine, her brain stopped growing. White matter in her brain is disappearing and we cannot figure out why. We know there is a possibility that she was vaccine-injured. Because of this, I did VERY THOROUGH RESEARCH, beyond your internet reads, pertaining to the ingredients, the effectiveness, the safety, etc of the vaccines given to our children. I have spoken with multiple doctors, whether they be pediatricians, or neurologists or geneticists. Every single one of them agrees there's a possibility of my daughter's condition being a reaction to a vaccine. We can't get our little girl back. We have to watch as this debilitating condition eats away at her brain, and will eventually likely take her life. ALL of her specialists have told us to avoid vaccines for our future children and to stop vaccinating our daughter until we know for sure.

For you to try and tell me that I'm shoving my opinions down others throats and trying to scare them into not getting the vaccine is highly offensive and rude. I have done nothing of the sort, but here you are, scaremongering these poor women, just like the media, into getting it. Way to be a hypocrite.

You should meet my college instructor's sister. She had the vaccine in her first trimester and gave birth to a little boy who was born with such severe allergies, he couldn't even have breastmilk. His bladder and kidneys were deformed. He lived for 63 days on sugar water before he passed away. He didn't have a chance at life. Recent studies have shown that women who receive the vaccine in their first trimester have a higher risk of their babies being born with this severe allergy and organ deformities. Are you going to tell that mother who shares her story that she's scaremongering pregnant women into not getting the vaccine?

All I have done is share my daughter's story. I have shared my research. I have shared my opinion, which, darling, is FACT, that we do not know the long-term effects of this vaccine and therefore, we do not know if it is 100% completely safe. Until long-term research on our unborn and newborn babies has been completed in another 30 years, to make sure the vaccine didn't have long-term debilitating effects, to make sure it didn't increase the incident of certain cancers, or allergies, or diseases, until we know, 30 years from now that these precious babies we carry and love have not been harmed in any way, shape or form from this vaccine, I will continue to share my story, and I will continue to encourage women to research the vaccines and their options prior to being scared into getting it, by doctors, the media, and other women like you, and make their own decision based on their findings.

Next time, word it differently if you don't want to seem like a hypocrite and if you don't want to offend, because I guarantee, I won't be the only one to read your post and become offended by it.
Well said! :thumbup: Even though I do vaccinate my kids, I never have nor never will get a FLU vaccine and until my kids are old enough to decide on their own if they want the flu vaccine, then they wont either. The Dr has not mentioned to me that it is in the best interest to get the flu vaccine, he has not mentioned that i should get my kids vaccinated for the flu...just the other stuff.
 
w/e, no point in trying to get points across as people will believe what they want to anyway, i honestly do not have the energy or motivation to respond just now so......:shrug:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Members online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,650,205
Messages
27,141,586
Members
255,678
Latest member
lynnedm78
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "c48fb0faa520c8dfff8c4deab485d3d2"
<-- Admiral -->