Akeres Habayis- Vaccines- Who's speaking???

eschaya

Sun, Feb 14 2016, 6:15 pm

Don't want to get involved in the whole debate, just want to open the eyes of those who may have gotten the "Informed Consent" pamphlet being distributed by PEACH, the same people who are advocating the akeres habayis hotline. I personally do not live in the tri-state area, but a relative of mine does, saw the pamphlet, and asked me to review it for validity.
Even before I looked things up to verify with the CDC and other national bodies I noticed so many blatant errors and misrepresentations ( I sincerely hope they are just errors and the result of poor research on the part of the writers, and not actual attempts at deceit, which is an additional aveirah they'd be committing...). They claim that doctors are encouraging pregnant women to get a dtap with every pregnancy; actually, national guidelines currently recommend a dtap once every 10 years. They claim that only 390 people are infected with meningitis nationally a year; current statistics show around 5000 cases a year with bacterial meningitis, which has a mortality rate of almost 20%. They claim kids are being forced to have 2 doses of the meningococcal vaccine; I don't live in NY so perhaps they do things differently there, but I believe that the first dose (age 11-14) is recommended while a second dose is kind of controversial (yes, even in the medical world) and is not required. They bring "evidence" to insinuate that aluminum in vaccines is causing anxiety in children (really, a morah noticing anxiety in her students is "evidence" of aluminum toxicity?? really?) yet the very numbers they present actually prove that the cumulative amount of aluminum received by a fully vaccinated 18 month old baby (5000 mcg acc to them, I have not verified) is within the range of acceptable (based on their number of 18.16 mcg/day in TPN). The outright sensationalist propaganda cartoons on the front have no validity or basis in reality, and other than the article on the first page which cites reputable sources (though misrepresents the data), all the other articles are taken from anti-vacc sites or not sourced at all (like the last page where they make claims about Andrew Wakefield that have been dubunked time and again). Even the first article, which appears on a surface level to be based on reputable sources, becomes questionable when you look more deeply at the details (ie: article titled "Acellular pertussis vaccines protect against disease but fail to prevent infection and transmission in a nonhuman primate model"... umm, did the writers fail to read the first half of the article title? or base their writing off a nonhuman model?). They try to shock uneducated women by telling you that vaccines are Category B drugs (!!!) while hoping you are not smart enough to look up and realize that category B means that "animal studies have failed to demonstrate a risk to the fetus". They attempt to link in your minds a recent increase in preterm babies, miscarriages and stillborn babies by mentioning it in the sentance following "unfortunately, many infants have been recently born suffering from the debilitating effects their mothers' prenatal vaccines" while never clarifying what "debilitating effects" they mean and how it could be in any way correlated (forget causation, they can't even show correlation) with a mother getting vaccinated. And I could go on.
Suffice it to say, the publication (and therefore the backing institution I would imagine) runs a campaign based on fear, propaganda, and no underlying data or evidence. Those who are strident anti-vaccers will not change their minds based on hard facts, so this post is not meant for you. THis is meant for the women who don't know or care much either way, who can be easily swayed by a mass distributed propagandist publication.
Please warn others, and please do your research. Oh, and also, if you read an article that tells you not to believe the AMA, the CDC, or your doctor, but instead to beleive a former employee of Merck (hmm, usually people who get laid off or quit a job aren't in the best relationship with their employers, just sayin)... I would immediately discount anything written there. But maybe I'm just strange that way!
I do not mean to argue whether vaccines are good or bad (as a healthcare provider I do strongly believe in vaccing when appropriate, though I very certainly acknowledge that there are risks), but rather to expose the blatant errors and misrepresentations being circulated by specific frum anti-vax organizations.

Maybe

Sun, Feb 14 2016, 7:26 pm

eschaya wrote:

Don't want to get involved in the whole debate, just want to open the eyes of those who may have gotten the "Informed Consent" pamphlet being distributed by PEACH, the same people who are advocating the akeres habayis hotline. I personally do not live in the tri-state area, but a relative of mine does, saw the pamphlet, and asked me to review it for validity.
Even before I looked things up to verify with the CDC and other national bodies I noticed so many blatant errors and misrepresentations ( I sincerely hope they are just errors and the result of poor research on the part of the writers, and not actual attempts at deceit, which is an additional aveirah they'd be committing...). (1)They claim that doctors are encouraging pregnant women to get a dtap with every pregnancy; actually, national guidelines currently recommend a dtap once every 10 years. They claim that only 390 people are infected with meningitis nationally a year; current statistics show around 5000 cases a year with bacterial meningitis, which has a mortality rate of almost 20%. They claim kids are being forced to have 2 doses of the (3)meningococcal vaccine; I don't live in NY so perhaps they do things differently there, but I believe that the first dose (age 11-14) is recommended while a second dose is kind of controversial (yes, even in the medical world) and is not required. They bring "evidence" to insinuate that aluminum in vaccines is causing anxiety in children (really, a morah noticing anxiety in her students is "evidence" of aluminum toxicity?? really?) yet the very numbers they present actually prove that the cumulative amount of aluminum received by a fully vaccinated 18 month old baby (5000 mcg acc to them, I have not verified) is within the range of acceptable (based on their number of 18.16 mcg/day in TPN). The outright sensationalist propaganda cartoons on the front have no validity or basis in reality, and other than the article on the first page which cites reputable sources (though misrepresents the data), all the other articles are taken from anti-vacc sites or not sourced at all (like the last page where they make claims about Andrew Wakefield that have been dubunked time and again). Even the first article, which appears on a surface level to be based on reputable sources, becomes questionable when you look more deeply at the details (ie: article titled " (2)Acellular pertussis vaccines protect against disease but fail to prevent infection and transmission in a nonhuman primate model"... umm, did the writers fail to read the first half of the article title? or base their writing off a nonhuman model?). They try to shock uneducated women by telling you that vaccines are Category B drugs (!!!) while hoping you are not smart enough to look up and realize that category B means that "animal studies have failed to demonstrate a risk to the fetus". They attempt to link in your minds a recent increase in preterm babies, miscarriages and stillborn babies by mentioning it in the sentance following "unfortunately, many infants have been recently born suffering from the debilitating effects their mothers' prenatal vaccines" while never clarifying what "debilitating effects" they mean and how it could be in any way correlated (forget causation, they can't even show correlation) with a mother getting vaccinated. And I could go on.
Suffice it to say, the publication (and therefore the backing institution I would imagine) runs a campaign based on fear, propaganda, and no underlying data or evidence. Those who are strident anti-vaccers will not change their minds based on hard facts, so this post is not meant for you. THis is meant for the women who don't know or care much either way, who can be easily swayed by a mass distributed propagandist publication.
Please warn others, and please do your research. Oh, and also, if you read an article that tells you not to believe the AMA, the CDC, or your doctor, but instead to beleive a former employee of Merck (hmm, usually people who get laid off or quit a job aren't in the best relationship with their employers, just sayin)... I would immediately discount anything written there. But maybe I'm just strange that way!
I do not mean to argue whether vaccines are good or bad (4)as a healthcare provider I do strongly believe in vaccing when appropriate, though I very certainly acknowledge that there are risks), but rather to expose the blatant errors and misrepresentations being circulated by specific frum anti-vax organizations.

Kindly do your homework 1st

(1)http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/preg-guide.htm

Tetanus, Diphtheria, and Pertussis (Tdap); & Tetanus and Diphtheria (Td)
Health-care personnel should administer a dose of Tdap during each pregnancy irrespective of the patient’s prior history of receiving Tdap. To maximize the maternal antibody response and passive antibody transfer to the infant, optimal timing for Tdap administration is between 27 and 36 weeks of gestation although Tdap may be given at any time during pregnancy.
For women not previously vaccinated with Tdap, if Tdap is not administered during
pregnancy, Tdap should be administered immediately postpartum.

(2) That is an FDA press release

http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/.....7.htm

(3) For a few dollars, this vaccine you admit is controversial, was forced on the NYS public.

http://www.assembly.state.ny.u.....ext=Y

Here is how they did it

http://www.nydailynews.com/new.....49907
http://capwiz.com/a-champ/issu.....rt=1,

(4) As a healthcare professional, shouldn't at least be more informed ?

Last edited by Maybe on Sun, Feb 14 2016, 10:23 pm; edited 2 times in total

amother

Ruby

Sun, Feb 14 2016, 9:01 pm

Maybe wrote:

Kindly do your homework 1st

(1)http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/preg-guide.htm

Tetanus, Diphtheria, and Pertussis (Tdap); & Tetanus and Diphtheria (Td)
Health-care personnel should administer a dose of Tdap during each pregnancy irrespective of the patient’s prior history of receiving Tdap. To maximize the maternal antibody response and passive antibody transfer to the infant, optimal timing for Tdap administration is between 27 and 36 weeks of gestation although Tdap may be given at any time during pregnancy.
For women not previously vaccinated with Tdap, if Tdap is not administered during
pregnancy, Tdap should be administered immediately postpartum.

(2) That is an FDA press release

http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/.....7.htm

(3) For a few dollars this vaccine you admit is controversial was forced on the NYS public

http://www.assembly.state.ny.u.....ext=Y

Here is how they did it

http://www.nydailynews.com/new.....49907
http://capwiz.com/a-champ/issu.....rt=1,

(4) is this how "informed" healthcare providers are ?

I didnt see the original text but eschaya is talking about dtap and you are referring to tdap... they are for different ages. That may the discrepancy

eschaya

Sun, Feb 14 2016, 9:01 pm

My, you're nasty today Maybe. I was really hoping to post my piece and then leave, because this debate is never going to lead to a resolution, but once you resort to insults (4) I will respond, once, politely, and then bow out of this conversation.
(1) I appreciate your bringing the update for pregnant women to my attention. Not working in pediatrics or MFM, I tend to follow guidelines for my patient population for which recommendations are every 10 years (for those who only had TD, a booster as early as 2 years with tdap is recommended).
(2) it was a study published in the proceedings of the national academy of sciences before it was included in the press release you quote
(3) I was not trying to debate, methinks we are on the same page here. Just to point out that I can't vouch for what and why they're doing in NY. Could be that more recent studies (as I pointed out above, I am not on top of every update for peds) find more evidence for benefit of a revax.
(4) no need to resort to insults. I am an acute care nurse practitioner for adults in an ICU. I do not deal with kids or maternal/fetal medicine (thank goodness!). My PCP and my kids' pediatrician is much better informed than I am with regard to current updates on vaccine schedules. My background does, however, give me a fine appreciation for the intensive study, years of clinical experience, and deep research that our providers have behind them, and I fully trust my providers.

"Ein kategor na'aseh sanegor" - if you put so much faith and trust into your quotes and close consideration of CDC updates and guidelines, how can you then distrust their every recommendation regarding vaccinations? And similarly, if you don't trust your doctors to manage this aspect of your children's care, why would you trust them to manage any other aspect of your child's healthcare? Can you do a home appendectomy, in necessary?

I'm bowing out now, and will not respond further. I hope all our children remain safe and healthy, and may Hashem watch over them carefully. I hope those who do receive a copy of the propagandist "Informed Consent" do not take it at face value.

LittleDucky

Mon, Feb 15 2016, 10:41 am

Ruchel wrote:

I have noticed that sometimes it runs in families, and sometines not.
Like gluten, etc.
Except the previous generation(s) didn't seem to have problems with vaccines and gluten. So apart from those who indeed have it in all generations, I wonder how and why it lo alenu started.

I'd never listen from a lady who hides, ftr, about such a topic.

Why today are we noticing more sensitivities/ reactions? Could be a host of things not related to vaccines. In other words, 400 years ago we didn't exactly run around with iPhones while feeding the horses...
Not blaming iPhones. Just one example of how life has changed.
Other major changes:
- more kids surviving infancy (death from common cold?)
-modern medicine like surgery to fix things that would have killed before.
-more men reaching adulthood and adding their genetic variance to the mix (no world wars with mandatory drafts and hundreds of thousands getting blown up on D day...).
- more of an international mix in society and more intermarriage, even in the frum world. We aren't only marrying the boy down the street. (BH! Didn't want him... Very Happy

). So we have genetic variations. People don't even know where their family is technically "from". Or have to list 10 different cities/regions.
- we know more people in this interconnected world. So when before saying "I know someone who had a reaction" it might have meant something, today it doesn't. Because we all know tens of thousands of people. And each of your "one person" could be the same person because we travel, meet people, go on imamother, listen to teleconferences, go to seminary/college/sleep away camp etc.
- or something as simple as clean life. Scientists are blaming kids allergies, asthma and other issues on being too clean. They never develop the tolerance. We aren't living in mud houses. We wash hands dozens of times a day, eat organic, vacuum, sweep, have air purifiers, sanitize everything, use hot water to wash clothes... Which is why some pediatricians are advocating to NOT do all of these all the time (unless someone is sick).

But yeah, we could also blame technology- it has an effect on obesity, not exercising, not getting enough time in the sun...
And there are many more reasons. Bottom line: life has changed!

Heyaaa

Mon, Feb 15 2016, 11:58 am

LittleDucky wrote:

You skipped GMOs and pesticides.