It is extremely unlikely that a vaccine could cause a rash that persisted for 3 months or had anything to do with it at all. You have to understand how common eczema is with children. Clinical studies have found no link between early childhood eczema and vaccinations.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18925883
This is so true, and I would like to add one point to this. When children are young like from birth up until about 3yrs of age Dr's will often refer to these skin rashes as a "form" of eczema as Dan notes because honestly it is so common in children. Dr's will often tell you they can grow out of it and will often prescribe medications for the rashes. What could also be happening is they might have an allergy which can contribute to the eczema as well. One feeds off the other. They eat something that makes them itch, they itch and then here comes the rash and all its glory. So when our daughter was young we just thought she had a form of eczema, but then when she started eating adult foods her eczema was more severe and lasted longer. So allergies can add to the effects of eczema and vice versa. And it's not a case of the Dr misdiagnosing, it's just that they don't like to test toddlers and young children for allergies because the tests can be difficult for them to handle, especially the scratch test or having to draw blood. So Dr's will often treat it as a form of Eczema with corticosteroids lotions and orals, but if the condition doesn't clear up thats when they recommend you to see an allergist.
 
Slightly on and off topic but didn't know where to post it.
http://www.iflscience.com/health-an...etween-prenatal-pesticide-exposure-and-autism

Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) affects about 1 in 68 children in the United States, and a combination of genetic and environmental factors, along with complications during pregnancy have been associated with ASD diagnoses. A new study from the National Institute of Environmental Health Services has strengthened the link between prenatal exposure to agricultural pesticides and ASD. The study’s findings have been published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives.

In 2003, University of California-Davis began the Childhood Autism Risks from Genes and Environment (CHARGE) study. This ongoing study seeks to identify causes and risk factors for ASD and other developmental delays (DD). This particular facet of the study explored prenatal exposure to agricultural pesticides, which have known neurotoxic effects.

The researchers compared addresses during pregnancy to state records of applications of organochlorines, organophosphates, pyrethroids, and carbamates within 1.25 km, 1.5 km, and 1.75 km from those addresses. About a third of the 970 study participants lived within 1.5 km (0.9 miles) of pesticide applications during pregnancy. While proximity to any of the four classes of pesticide resulted in an increased risk of a child with ASD or DD, some of the chemicals presented a greater risk at different stages during pregnancy.


Read more at http://www.iflscience.com/health-an...icide-exposure-and-autism#cWkjy7k7RIsv63jB.99
Content from External Source
I'm unsure if pyrethroids are the same as pyrethum and if it is also certified for organic farming. I think the former is synthetic and the latter is not.

Good to point out this bit here.
The study focused on where the pesticides were applied, not the diet of the mothers and how much or which pesticides were potentially ingested.
Content from External Source
 
Ok, but as I read your post it seems like you've debunked the myth about vaccines on your own since you continuously acknowledge how food's, such as wheat or meats are most likely the cause of his itching and rashes.
There is no doubt that food is intensely involved. But the vaccine pushed him over the edge. Nothing in the breastmilk changed. And the vaccine was subsequently identified to be highly allergic for him using the same testing methods that positively identified everything else he was highly allergic to.

With that said, I'm not debunking an electrodermal testing, all I'm telling you to do is take him for an allergy test at an allergist.
We already did, after visiting the dermatologist. It's just the allergist in this case was a Naturopath and used a method of testing that we don't understand. We cut out the substances he identified, took the homeopathic drops and creams he prescribed and our son cleared up completely. He's 6 now and is very happy and doesn't flare up :) Very interestingly, he has developed a vomit reflex to some of the foods that used to make him break out in itchy hives. We think this is an incredibly helpful development! If his body has learned to reject the foods outright, that's a huge plus.

We shared your pain on creams. The vast majority would hurt him. Another big plus for the Naturopath was the incredibly expensive Vitamin D cream he prescribed. I was resentful of the high price and ordered some other cream off Amazon that looked the same and also said "vitamin D cream" on the bottle, but it burned his skin and made him cry. This guy just really knew his stuff.

How about you try going to a real Dr. I don't mean to be coy with you. But lets pretend for a moment that god forbid something serious is happening with your son, wife, or yourself included. It pertains to the heart or brain, or organs like your kidney. Do you intend to go the homeopathic route first, or will you visit a specialist?
We did. We ended up at a Naturpath as a last resort. We literally spent thousands flying out to a health care provider not covered by our insurance because the ones that are covered wouldn't or couldn't help. If I end up with a heart or brain or kidney issue I'm sure I'll see a real doctor first. But I think I've learned how important it can be to get a second opinion from someone invested in alternate methods of healing.

Seems like the meat isn't actually what is causing it, if that's the case.
His eczema is really fascinating in that it blooms within seconds of contact with his triggers. About 75% of ground beef causes him to flare up. And it is definately the beef. We basically just treat it like an allergen. I suspect none of us would eat beef either if 75% of the time we did, we ended up itching all over our bodies...

Did everything on the list turn out to be a trigger?

Pretty much yes. We didn't try to expose him to the things on the list. We just ended up making mistakes sometimes and discovering that "Oh, yes, that really is quite bad". Black pepper was one of them. It's so easy to forget and sprinkle black pepper into recipes. Especially Grandma and Grandpa who didn't have the daily reminder.

But so as stuff died down in sensitivity over consecutive testings and then appeared to drop off his "bad list", we would then try adding them to his diet, with mixed results. Sometimes he was still sensitive even though the equipment says he no longer was. Sometimes he wasn't.

It is extremely unlikely that a vaccine could cause a rash that persisted for 3 months or had anything to do with it at all. You have to understand how common eczema is with children. Clinical studies have found no link between early childhood eczema and vaccinations.
The Naturopath believed that our son had a compromised immune system and low liver function, and that the shot pushed him over the cliff so to speak. Since he was right about everything else that made him red, we are inclined to believe him on this too.

Were you treating him at all for the rashes before the vaccine?
Of course. We had found that glaxal base and then vasseline seemed to work reasonably well for skin moisture. Pre-shot, it was quite manageable. A good bath followed by the cream and then the vaseline to seal it all was enough for him to be able to get to sleep without scratching. Not so after the shot. Very very bad...

I think I fault western medicine the most for its failure to acknowledge that the co-incident shot could possibly have had anything to do with it. A method of testing which was successful in identifying his other triggers also identified the shot as being one. If we only had "Post Hoc", then I can see the validity of saying that it also snowed, or whatever, as Mick does above. But we subsequently identified the "Proctor Hoc" separately. But it was identified through a means of testing that is not recognized within the structural paradigm of our medical science establishment. This does not make it invalid. It rather invalidates the credibility of the medical establishment....at least in this case.

Do you know what allergy test your pediatrician ran? If he was testing for IgE antibodies (antibodies associated with allergic responses), it might not have detected it. IgE tests are just an initial screen and infants may not have developed enough IgE's to give a positive result yet. There are other immune system functions that can trigger allergic reactions.
No, I'm sorry I don't.

To us, the bottom line is that the Naturopath fixed him, and using a bunch of quackery. The electrodermal testing is supposed to be bunk. So are the homeopathic tinctures. Yet the specialist dermatologist that we visited, and who must have had at least 12 years of schooling to reach this position, was worse than useless, as was our family MD. It really peeves me off that our dermatologist visit likely cost the public health care system more than the cost of both the flights to Kelowna and the first month of visits with the Naturopath. And it was sooooo useless.

Our son was healed outside the box of the accepted medical system. And the fellow who healed him believed that the shot dramatically exhascerbated the problem. If western medicine had done anything right, I might be more inclined to believe the "it couldn't have been this or that" stuff that proponents of western medicine throw out. But as it stands, it simply appears that their reasoning has been tied down and constrained in such a way as to prevent them doing their job.
 
Last edited:
There is no doubt that food is intensely involved. But the vaccine pushed him over the edge. Nothing in the breastmilk changed. And the vaccine was subsequently identified to be highly allergic for him using the same testing methods that positively identified everything else he was highly allergic to
not to be impolite, but you say the "Naturopath" pegged the mmr vaccine. but that doesn't make a lot of sense to me. WHAT "IN" the mmr vaccine did it peg? I provided a link of ingredients earlier and I don't recall now exactly what the "bovine" ingredient was but if your son is allergic to meat (?).

Mostly I'm bringing this up... that you should find out SPECIFICALLY what in the vaccine caused the reaction because if the vaccine made his eczema worse, can you imagine what ACTUALLY getting measles (MR) might do to him? Have you considered that?
 
Mostly I'm bringing this up... that you should find out SPECIFICALLY what in the vaccine caused the reaction because if the vaccine made his eczema worse, can you imagine what ACTUALLY getting measles (MR) might do to him? Have you considered that?
That is a very interesting point. If it was the measles component itself that caused the skin condition to worsen, what would actually getting measles do...frightening line of reasoning.

I don't remember seing the post with the ingredient list. I'll look back through it.

I have always imagined that getting measles would be like it was for me when I had measles. After being vaccinated for it. I had dots all over and a high fever, and then I got better. I think this is what happens to the vast majority of kids who get the measles, isn't it?

As I said, I have inquired into whether I can pay extra for clean, live virus based vaccines and we are not allowed to do that in Canada. We have only the option of injecting the second rate stuff with the adjuvents in it. I don't put much credit in someone like Merkel who takes a different shot saying that the cheap stuff is safe. I would rather pay for the expensive stuff and truly play it safe. But no can do...so we checked out. One strike was enough for us. No need for strikes two and three...
 
OK @deirdre I found your ingredient list post. It doesn't list the stuff in the MMR vaccine though, unless it is named something different than I would recognize.

if your pediatrician wouldn't give you the info, you can contact the manufacturer direct. only because if such a severe reaction WAS caused by a vaccine it is kinda imperative you report this info to the manufacturer and the cdc. But heres a list from the cdc to get you started.
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/appendices/B/excipient-table-2.pdf

I do find it odd that we need to include aluminum, MSG, and formaldehyde in vaccines. I think these are the cheap adjuvents that Merkel was able to avoid exposure to, and that are deemed "safe" for us. I'm pretty sure those things are bad. Also the references to monkey cells are disturbing. Wasn't it monkey cells that caused the tainted Polio vaccine in the late fifties or early sixties or whenever that was? It was a big scandal. The tainted vaccines had some kind of cancer causing monkey virus in them. SV40 it was called if I remember correctly.

I'm all for high quality vaccinations. But I think our sons' reaction likely stemmed from the cheap crap.
 
Last edited:
I think this is what happens to the vast majority of kids who get the measles, isn't it?
the vast majority of kids don't get severe eczema from a piece of meat or wheat though. Considering the extreme sensitivity of his skin ( I don't know much about eczema to be honest), personally I would prefer dealing with just eczema vs eczema with measles on top of it!

Either way, I don't think it's fair for you to 'spread the word' and tell others not to vaccinate their kids based on your 'evidence'. Mostly because if they listen to you, your boy is gonna have a much greater chance of actually contracting measles from all his non vaccinated neighbors.
 
Strange...I opened it again and saw the last few pages which were not there when I saw it first. Probably just a glitch in my web browser. Thanks :)

Either way, I don't think it's fair for you to 'spread the word' and tell others not to vaccinate their kids based on your 'evidence'. Mostly because if they listen to you, your boy is gonna have a much greater chance of actually contracting measles from all his non vaccinated neighbors.
Yes I've considered this. But the problem is that I'm currently convinced that my son had some type of allergic reaction, that the disclosed side effect rates are not correct, and that there is institutional bias towards rejecting side effects as being falacious in the manner than Mick did, i.e. your son also watched TV today, but it isn't the TV's fault that your child has this or that happening.

So I consider it my responsibility to blow the whistle on the lack of credibility. That and the crappy ingredients and the fact that we are running a two tiered system with live virus based vaccines for the elite and dead virus / adjuvent based vaccines for the "herd".
 
OK @deirdre I found your ingredient list post. It doesn't list the stuff in the MMR vaccine though, unless it is named something different than I would recognize.


MMR (MMR-II)


Medium 199, Minimum Essential Medium, phosphate, recombinant human albumin, neomycin, sorbitol, hydrolyzed gelatin, chick embryo cell culture, WI-38 human diploid lung fibroblasts


December, 2010


Content from External Source

I do find it odd that we need to include aluminum, MSG, and formaldehyde in vaccines. I think these are the cheap adjuvents

There is a reason for every ingredient. I have posted about this previously in this thread. If you are series about this I suggest you read it. Aluminum is an adjuvant in vaccines, but nothing else you mentioned is. MSG acts as a storing agent so that vaccines have a longer shelf life and can be transported without being damaged. Formaldehyde inactivates viruses so that it can't cause infection.

Wasn't it monkey cells that caused the tainted Polio vaccine in the late fifties or early sixties or whenever that was? It was a big scandal. The tainted vaccines had some kind of cancer causing monkey virus in them. SV40 it was called if I remember correctly.

I have posted about this before as well. I suggest you go back and read through my posts before you talk the way you have about the scientific method and the approaches taken here. SV40 does not cause cancer and there is no evidence to suggest it does.

Pretty much yes. We didn't try to expose him to the things on the list.

I find it strange that he gave such a long list that then had to be changed over time. It sounds like he was just guessing rather than using a well-working instrument. Whether or not that is actually the case, I suppose we can't say for sure.


So I consider it my responsibility to blow the whistle on the lack of credibility.

With one case that could very likely be a coincidence as your evidence? Do you not see that this is extreme?

The fact of the matter is that your son developed a serious rash and is now fine. Another fact is that many children develop rashes before age 1 and then grow out of them as they get older. Whether or not your son was cured by naturopath (for the record, homeopathy definitely doesn't work) or by the placebo effect (getting better for reasons other than treatment), we cannot say for sure.

What we can say for sure is that the decision to not vaccinate your children is unfounded. It is possible to develop a mild rash after an MMR vaccine but it still doesn't seem likely that it caused your son's skin condition. Since MMR vaccine uses live attenuated virus (you seemed to think this is safer in your earlier posts), it is not recommended to give it to severely immune-compromised patients. Your son, however, should not have been immune-compromised unless he is suffering from a condition. To put this in perspective, HIV patients have been found to be safe to take the MMR vaccine whether they are symptomatic or asymptomatic. MMR vaccines have been demonstrated to be extremely safe.

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00023141.htm

One last question, is your son allergic to eggs?
 
Last edited:
What we can say for sure is that the decision to not vaccinate your children is unfounded.
This is what we always get from the establishment. But we didn't receive any answers or solutions from them either. The solutions came from a Naturopath prescribing Homeopathic remedies. The absolute certainty of the medical establishment is scary and unfounded, and deserves to be exposed as ignorant.

One last question, is your son allergic to eggs?
Yes.

SV40 does not cause cancer and there is no evidence to suggest it does.
Really? I googled it and found quotes on a bunch of anti-vax sites which certainly implies that it does. This one for instance:

"A study of 59,000 women found that children of mothers who received the Salk vaccine between 1959 and 1965 had brain tumors at a rate 13 times greater than mothers who did not receive those polio shots."
New England Journal of Medicine 1988; 318; 1469

I unfortunately can not find the full study to read it and look at the context of this quote and whether it has been taxen dramatically out of context or something. I watched a CBC documentary on SV40 over a decade ago. It was done by the Fifth Estate and was very convincing. The Fifth Estate strongly implied that SV40 did indeed cause cancer and that it was swept under the rug.
 
Last edited:

Egg proteins are found in MMR vaccines. Your son may have had an allergic reaction to the egg.

Really? I googled it and found quotes on a bunch of anti-vax sites which certainly implies that it does.

Anti-vax web sites haven't been found to be entirely truthful. From my original post:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/...ionid=4FDAC67D663B49101FB866D4C8C74049.f03t01 (http://archive.is/U7gzC)
Content from external source
The present review of recent studies showed that the earlier results describing the recovery of SV40 DNA sequences from a large proportion of the above tumors were not reproducible and that most studies were negative. Contamination with laboratory plasmids was identified as a possible source of false positive results in some previous studies. The low-level immunoreactivity of human sera to SV40 was very likely the result of cross-reactivity with antibodies to the SV40-related human polyomaviruses BKV and JCV, rather than of authentic SV40 infection. SV40 sero-reactivity in patients with the suspect tumors was no greater than that in controls. In epidemiologic studies, the increased incidence of some of the suspect tumors in the 1970s to 1980s was not related to the risk of exposure to SV40-contaminated vaccines. In summary, the most recent evidence does not support the notion that SV40 contributed to the development of human cancers.
Content from External Source
 
We cut out the substances he identified, took the homeopathic drops and creams he prescribed and our son cleared up completely.
Can you please provide us with the homeopathic substances he prescribed and the droplets as well. Ingredients and or names for the brand would be immensely hepful
 
Anti-vax web sites haven't been found to be entirely truthful.
But what if the establishment is/was not being truthful regarding SV40 and the Anti-vax sites are?

Here's another disturbing quote from an anti-vax site. Now this is simply a quote...but I always thought the SF Chronicle was a good paper:

"Despite official denials of any correlation between polio vaccines, SV-40 and increased cancer rates, by April 2001, 62 papers from 30 laboratories around the world had reported SV-40 in human tissues and tumours.

San Francisco Chronicle July 15, 2001"

Anyhow, I'm not wanting to debate SV40 with you and SV40 is not why we stopped vaccinating.

Our adverse reaction and that the medical establishment is unable to acknowlebge the adverse reaction is why we warn people away. There is a dangerous myopia in establishment science. We are repeatedly asked to discard as "coincidence" things that can not possibly be coincidences. Such as all of the correct trigger diagnoses that the supposedly debunked Naturpath successfully made. All coincidence? What are the chances of him randomly and correctly picking "black pepper" out of the air? One in a million? And so what would the chances be then of him correctly picking thirty or fourty things correctly? One in a billion? We are expected to call this coincidence? Unfortunately because of the myopia, we are left with no middle ground. It is very unfortunate.

Good call on the eggs. I wish our MD or specialist had made that call, or any number of other calls that were within their ability to grasp.
 
As I said, I have inquired into whether I can pay extra for clean, live virus based vaccines and we are not allowed to do that in Canada.
If you can afford to fly all over and seek medical attention, it wouldn't harm you to drive across the border into a state and vaccinate your child. Just curious here, do you live in a city environment or in the colder smaller towns of Canada
 
and that there is institutional bias towards rejecting side effects
i don't understand why you keep saying this. you DIDNT report the side effects. They didn't reject your information, you never presented it.

and, just fyi, Metabunk is not the "establishment" and Mick was right with his TV analogy.
 
i don't understand why you keep saying this. you DIDNT report the side effects. They didn't reject your information, you never presented it.

and, just fyi, Metabunk is not the "establishment" and Mick was right with his TV analogy.
You're exactly right Dee, he never reported it. So how can he say the adverse effects either go unnoticed or are poorly reported, when he himself never took the opportunity to report it.
 
We are repeatedly asked to discard as "coincidence" things that can not possibly be coincidences. Such as all of the correct trigger diagnoses that the supposedly debunked Naturpath successfully made. All coincidence? What are the chances of him randomly and correctly picking "black pepper" out of the air?
its pretty easy to list all the things people in general tend to be allergic to. Perhaps the reaction you get from the medical establishment is more to do with how and what info you are providing them. ex: don't tell your doctor, a naturopath used his star trek laser on our son and found out he is allergic to eggs. Just say, our son is allergic to eggs, can we get a vaccine without egg protein?

I agree with Jason, the medical establishment ie your pediatrician, is certainly not out to hurt your kids or hide the truth. But if you don't trust your pediatrician, you do absolutely need to find a new one. (If he hasn't kicked you out of his practice already because a lot of doctors don't want unvaccinated kids in their waiting rooms. Its wicked dangerous to newborns and immune deficient children.
 
Can you please provide us with the homeopathic substances he prescribed and the droplets as well. Ingredients and or names for the brand would be immensely hepful

Here are some:

- Detoxoside (Fungi & Yeasts)
- Oligo-muet
- Dropper bottle that just says "#7 Lung"
- Dropper bottle that just says "desensitizing drops"
- Traumeel
- Viburnum Cantana
- Pleorub
- Geovita
- Prunus Amygdalus
- Lymph-A-Drop
- Pleo LAT
- Pleo Def
- NOT-A-QUENT

And about three or four other dropper bottles that just say "desensitizing drops". This is what remains of his pharmacy of dropper bottles at age 6. We were droppering various tinktures into him for years now, and as we've said he seems to be pretty much perfect at this point...so we have stopped going to see Wagstaff. That and Wagstaff died. His wife carried on the practice but we believe he was incredibly talented and that perhaps many of his abilities were specific to him.

P.S. Early on he made the whole family do a Candida cleanse. We weren't allowed to eat anything dried, fungus, fermented things, sweeteners, or even leftovers. And then after the candida cleanse he made us all take Lactobaccilus Accidopholus or whatever that good gut bacteria is called.
 
Last edited:
and, just fyi, Metabunk is not the "establishment" and Mick was right with his TV analogy.

Here's another example of the misconception of unrelated "cause & effect":

A young child is playing in the backyard, and picks up her favourite toy....and then it begins to rain.

NOW, the child might think to herself: "I can control the weather, just by picking up my toy!"

{edit}: Again, this is the "basic" thinking of centuries ago (pre-science illumination) that has led to the Human propensity for religion. "Omens". (ETC...)
 
You're exactly right Dee, he never reported it. So how can he say the adverse effects either go unnoticed or are poorly reported, when he himself never took the opportunity to report it.
We did report it. We just reported it to people that would listen. If one is convinced the system is blind in some fashion, why put a blindfold on and fumble around yourself? There are other options. We participated in those.
 
Metabunk is not the "establishment"
For better or worse, I have found that Metabunk almost always toes the establishment line. You guys do it more thoughtfully than our politicians and the media. But you represent, I think, the best of the best in terms of analytical style defence of the status quo.
 
For better or worse, I have found that Metabunk almost always toes the establishment line. You guys do it more thoughtfully than our politicians and the media. But you represent, I think, the best of the best in terms of analytical style defence of the status quo.

That's certainly not my intent. I'm no fan of the status quo.
 
For better or worse, I have found that Metabunk almost always toes the establishment line
another coincidence you are misconstruing. Metabunk follows the science. That's it.

you kid is SIX now? and you're still blaming the mmr? and crediting tinctures? I'm speechless.
 
We did report it. We just reported it to people that would listen. If one is convinced the system is blind in some fashion, why put a blindfold on and fumble around yourself? There are other options. We participated in those.
Who exactly did you report it to that wouldn't listen if you don't mind me asking?
 
you kid is SIX now? and you're still blaming the mmr? and crediting tinctures? I'm speechless.
I'm not. I call it out from the rooftops. :p

Who exactly did you report it to that wouldn't listen if you don't mind me asking?
Come on guys. You yourselves represent a very good cross section of the type of people we would/do encounter from within the medical establishment, and their viewpoints. I must assume that our son's circumstances have made no dent whatsoever in your system of beliefs, ie the beliefs that @WeedWhacker characterizes as beliefs "otherwise known as "science", even though that same science supposedly discredited the things used to identify our sons problems and heal them. The science is flawed. It is OK for you to think it isn't. But it is also OK for me to warn people away from it for that very reason.
 
But it is also OK for me to warn people away from it
No, in fact, it isn't ok.

But if I knew you were talking 6 years ago I wouldn't have tried to help your son. Anti- vax was all the rage then, and since you now have to continue to justify not getting your kids vaccinated I was just wasting my breath.

Was an interesting chat though.
 
For better or worse, I have found that Metabunk almost always toes the establishment line
another coincidence you are misconstruing. Metabunk follows the science. That's it.
No...Metabunkers, like anyone else, have an axe to grind. "Following the science" is a very good cloak for disguising your particular axe as having fallen out of some type of divine irrefutible process rooted only in logic and deduction. But science circularly defines itself. Your reasoning too is based on a fallacy. Unfortunately there are things that are not possible to understand from within the linear etiological approach in which your system of treasured "proof" is rooted. The entire system of Chinese medicine is a very good example. Wagstaff's references to "Yin" and "Yang" might be laughed off by you here, where they would not be laughed off in the East.

Belief in science as a be all and end all results in some very arrogant practitioners. Some of them, in my opinion, post here.
 
Come on guys. You yourselves represent a very good cross section of the type of people we would/do encounter from within the medical establishment, and their viewpoints. I must assume that our son's circumstances have made no dent whatsoever in your system of beliefs, - the beliefs "otherwise known as "science", even though that science supposedly discredited the things used to identify our sons problems and heal them. The science is flawed. It is OK for you to think it isn't. But it is also OK for me to warn people away from it for that reason.
Trust me when my daughter was in the hospital with pneumonia I was questioning everything. I even doubted the Dr.'s and became one of those pain in the ass parents who made sure the Dr didn't leave the room after examining her. I forced them to explain what the hell was going on with her in a layman sort of way so my wife and I could understand them. I looked to the net, family, and friends for answers, but at the end of the day, I trusted the science and medicine so my daughter could get better. We were so close to losing her the first time she got pneumonia. In conjunction with her severe allergies and rashes we thought they must've been missing something. My paranoid delusional self put my daughter through countless test making sure they checked ever inch of her body, and every drop of blood and urine that came out of her body. I learned how to read lab results for her blood and white cell counts so that I could understand the direction my daughter was heading in. I prayed to a god that I never believed in and asked him to take my life over hers. So yeah, I've been down that road Libertarian. But science and medicine, and good old patience saved her life, not once but twice. God only knows what would've happened to my daughter if I started to disbelieve in the medical "establishment" as you like to call it. Her second time around with pneumonia could quite possibly have killed her if I tried doing homeopathic remedies instead of dealing with professionals.

You often talk of how the establishment ignores coincidences for their benefit, yet you fail to see you're doing the same thing here. You're ignoring the blaring white elephant in the room. How you ignored the "coincidence" that food creates these allergic reactions in your son. Instead, you chose to incorporate a vaccine that's been 3 months removed and lump in with all the other items. Your answer to Dan above about how your son is allergic to eggs pretty much sums all of this up very nicely to be honest with you. The vaccine uses egg embryos which in turn could've caused your son's reaction in combination with other foods. It wasn't the viruses in the vaccine that caused it, it was the "egg". I mean come on, isn't it so obvious to you know. It's also amazing how your naturpath or homeopathic specialist never bothered to mention that significant detail to you or your wife. Instead they blame one of the greatest discoveries in human history, the vaccine....
 
It's also amazing how your naturpath or homeopathic specialist never bothered to mention that significant detail to you or your wife. Instead they blame one of the greatest discoveries in human history, the vaccine....
Unfortunately it wasn't a great discovery for us. I agree that there might well be something to the egg. But there is also a lot of good in what our Naturopath said and did. And since our doctors are incapable or too arrogant to look at what he was doing in order to incorporate it into their ability to heal others, it is our responsibility to look elsewhere ourselves.

None of you has addressed the supposedly "debunked" method that the Naturopath used to identify all of the things we needed to avoid. Why aren't our healthcare practitioners using a similar device to test for egg sensitivities prior to injecting our treasured vaccines into babies? Is the answer "arrogance"? No. The answer is "Science" of course. We were just that one in a billion coincidence. Come on.

Our system stinks from the head.
 
And we were just that one in a billion coincidence

One in a billion? How do you figure that?

If it was just infant dermatitis that occured and resolved at about the same time as the events, then it was a perfectly ordinary coincidence, of the type that happens all the time.

And even a one in a billion coincidence happens to seven people a day.
 
None of you has addressed the supposedly "debunked" method that the Naturopath used to identify all of the things we needed to avoid. Why aren't our healthcare practitioners using a similar device to test for egg sensitivities prior to injecting our treasured vaccines into babies? Is the answer "arrogance"?
you would need to start a new thread for that. this thread is about vaccines.
 
And there is also a lot of good in what our Naturopath said and did.
I don't disagree with the fact that homeopathic lotions can be beneficial in the same way how people prefer organic foods. I also don't think anyone is telling you homeopathic remedies are hogwash, but that you shouldn't trust them over a DR. Thats all in a nutshell... Some lotions work better than others and homeopathic ones might not contain irritants in them like acetyl alcohol. But honestly if you look at the ingredients in them vs aveno or other over the counter products you will see that both usually share some of the ingredients, minus all of the fillers and chemicals to keep the lotion active and mixed so it doesn't break down and separate...
 
I agree that there might well be something to the egg
I would go back to your naturpath or homeopathic specialist and ask why they never thought to mention this to you after they determined that your son was allergic to eggs.... Their response could open your eyes a bit
 
It's also amazing how your naturpath or homeopathic specialist never bothered to mention that significant detail to you or your wife
I think its amazing the Naturopath "pegged" "the MMR vaccine". That's like pegging a mcdonalds cheese burger. without mentioning WHICH part of the cheeseburger. weird.
 
Back
Top