Log in

No account? Create an account
Previous Entry Share Flag Next Entry
The Facts In The Case Of Dr. Andrew Wakefield
diversion sign
A fifteen page story about the MMR vaccination controversy. As ever, I'm sure a few spelling errors have slipped past me. Feel free to point any out so I can correct them.

The reference links for the strip are in the next blog entry.

Now! Let's have a heated debate!

2013 update. Since I wrote this blog entry, this cartoon strip as well as many others on such subjects as homeopathy, chiropratic, evolution, and the supposed NASA Moon hoax landings, have been published in a book: Science Tales in the UK (Myriad Edtions) and How To Fake A Moon Landing in the US and Canada (Abrams). Here's the link to my main blog.

1 MMR Vaccination Scandal Story

2 MMR Vaccination Scandal Story

3 MMR Vaccination Scandal Story

4 MMR Vaccination Scandal Story

5 MMR Vaccination Scandal Story

6 MMR Vaccination Scandal Story

MMR 7 Vaccination Scandal Story

MMR 8 Vaccination Scandal Story

MMR 9 Vaccination Scandal Story

MMR 10 Vaccination Scandal Story

mmr 11 Vaccination Scandal Story

MMR 12 Vaccination Scandal Story

MMR 13 Vaccination Scandal Story

MMR 14 Vaccination Scandal Story

MMR 15 Vaccination Scandal Story

I am Darryl Cunningham and this is my main blog.

  • 1
But Tallguy-whether you are pro or anti vaccine this isn't the truth. Did you read his study? The conclusion was... MORE research needs to be done!
You can not convince people to trust "science" when something as simple as this is twisted. So you have a parent that reads all the sorts of articles like this then they get their hands on the actual study. Seems like "science" is full of a bunch of fools who can't read a study or are they deliberately lying??? You see the problem. There is a serious need for LESS propaganda BS and more honesty. The US is the only country giving vaccines like Hep B to new born infants but parents are villainized for even questioning it. I'd like to see more science in science and less BS and fear mongering.

The US is by far not the only country and is actually in the majority of countries who give HepB at birth and a whole lot of countries also give BCG at the same time. There is nothing wrong with questioning why they need it ever. What is wrong is to question it in this way. HepB is a sexually transmitted disease and from IV drug use and tattoos, why would my newborn baby ever come into contact with these things? While it is true that those activities increase your risk for contracting a HepB infection, that is obviously not the only way to get it since most HepB infections that become chronic were contracted before the age of 5. Children under the age of 5 have a difficult time clearing liver infections. Liver infections that cannot be cleared become chronic and can lead to liver cancer. We (countries who approved it) to 31/5-4 year old children. This did decrease the incidence of HepB infections in children, but not by near enough so they progressively started giving them at early ages and the incidence went down considerably. That is good science.

I can also understand where you are getting a lot of scary information from both sides, but if look closely only one side has any evidence and it is not just from science, it is from history and anthropology. It is dangerous not to get your children vaccinated. Listen to what Benjamin Franklin had to say about a the really dangerous practice of inoculating for
smallpox (taking pus from an infected person and stabbing someone with it repeatedly). " “In 1736 I lost one of my sons, a fine boy of four years old, by the small-pox, taken in the common way,” he wrote. “I long regretted bitterly, and still regret that I had not given it to him by inoculation.

“This I mention for the sake of parents who omit that operation, on the supposition that they should never forgive themselves if a child died under it, my example showing that the regret may be the same either way and that, therefore, the safer should be chosen.”

I meant to say began to give it to 31/2-4 ...

Can I suggest that you actually-actually meant to write "3.5 - 4"? Or even "three and a half to four"?

(Fractions in text are just... never clear, under any circumstances. Your corrected version still says "thirty-one slash two to four" to me. I was completely confused what "thirty-one slash five to four" meant in the original comment, and only worked out what the correction meant by comparison between the two.)

The reason why Hep B was originally mandated because the primary method of contracting Hep B in the US prior to the Hep B vaccination being given at birth was in hospitals due to improper sterilization and needle disposal practices. The "Hep B at birth" mandate was "CYA" advocated by the medical community to prevent the transmission of the disease as opposed to actually changing hospital practices. Now that hospital practices have evolved in the past 2-3 decades there is little to no risk of transmission of Hep B to a patient in a U.S. hospital setting. So, why have our vaccination practices not evolved to meet the evolution of the associated risk? Just because it is common practice to vaccinate, give vitamin K and erythromycin eye ointment at birth doesn't meant that it is safe or okay for the child... birth is fairly tough and in that first 24 hrs we are saying (with our practices), "I know you were just born, but if you could develop antibodies to a disease you have little risk of being exposed to, get that blood to clotting (with no regard as to the necessity of the treatment, the difficult of the birth, etc) and oh, while you are at it, let me shove this stuff in your eyes in case your slut of a mom happens to have an STD that we previously have not detected prior to your vaginal birth." Uh... yea, I'm going to go ahead and opt out of all three of those with my newborn, quick easy natural labor & delivery and last but not least, my monogamous sexual relationship. :)

  • 1