A Guide For The Perplexed On Vaccinations: What The Coffee Jitters Tell Us

In following the vaccine debate, I've observed what seem like two completely different versions of reality. For those perplexed by this, here's a brief guide to a basic issue underlying this long-standing controversy: biological individuality. If properly understood, it can create the ground for reconciliation.

Have you ever noticed that feet come in all shapes and sizes?

Why do you adore spicy food while your beloved hates it?

How come your friend can handle a lot more alcohol than you?

So whence cometh the assumption that we're all completely unique on the outside, but exactly the same inside?

Most people don't even react to coffee the same way!

If my calm and collected pal Charlie drinks any caffeine whatsoever, he morphs into a jittery Mr. Hyde--complete with road rage. My friend Lynn sleeps like a baby even after an evening expresso. Me? If I drink caffeine after lunch, I'm up watching Sex and the City re-runs until 1 A.M.

Our differing reactions to coffee are just one of thousands that reveal that what's going on inside of each one of us is just as distinct as our outer appearance. Scientists call this biochemical individuality.

Excepting water, no food, drug, or substance is good for all of the people all of the time. What's helpful for some, can be useless or harmful for others. Yet medical research tends towards majority rule. If it's statistically proven to work for some, then we leap forward to assume it must be great for everyone--despite all the common sense evidence about how totally unique each one of us is.

Let's look at one subset of people who can't handle things others can handle. People with allergies. I first heard the word "allergy," at a kid's birthday party when a tot named Maddy refused the strawberry shortcake, pronouncing dolefully, "I'm allergic." The same to chocolate cake.

Was an allergy some kind of curse? I sadly wondered.

To the non-allergic, allergies can seem mysterious, unmanly, or even non-existent. But a good number of people are indeed sensitive, intolerant, or outright allergic to common foods, toxins, viruses, bacteria, adjutants-- any ingredient that interacts poorly with individual biochemistry. According to the Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America, 25% of Americans, 60 million people have recognized allergies--and that's not counting all of the individual sensitivities.

Beyond that, we've all been exposed to various stuff that differentiates our immune response capacity from our neighbor's. Tests reveal that fetuses are filled with environmental toxins, metals, you name it, all received in utero--which can impact immune response. Diet and lifestyle factors, even the internal bacteria we harbor, all influence health, resilience, and immune competence--together determining how each person will react to a drug, shot, or food.

That's why when high risk health decisions face us, it's vital to evaluate all relevant factors. However, apart from a vanguard group of integrative physicians, doctors don't routinely study factors acting in synergy within an individual. Therefore, despite statistical predictions of how a majority will react to a vaccination, it's impossible to accurately predict how any individual will respond.

Nor has mainstream medical science defined those at higher risk for adverse reactions, so people only find out after they get the shot-- leading some to consider autistic children--well, guinea pigs.

If for some, vaccines are a significant contributing factor, many adults will soon have an opportunity to join a similar experiment thanks to the Swine Flu vaccine, which a recent lawsuit filed in New York State claims has not undergone the substantive safety testing mandated by the FDA. Last week. on behalf of New York health workers, attorney James S. Turner, asked for a restraining order until "carefully conducted double blind placebo controlled studies trials (are) done in accordance with FDA regulations, and...reviewed by FDA scientists." A New York judge halted the vaccine mandate in response. For more information, go to www.citizens.org

Despite tremendous scientific advances, medical research does not capture the totality of individual variation. Most statistical results routinely ignore a great many operative factors since they are harder to study. That's why reactions to any substance--including vaccinations--differ. So who has the criteria and the right to decide?

Mounting health care costs require that we all become empowered and active for our health. We need a medical science that accounts for individual variations in response--so that we can better predict the risk factors for adverse outcomes, helping us to screen those at risk. Turner questions whether the vaccine should be ever mandated, because it removes the individual right to make this crucial health decision--based on our unique individual health profile.

For health information, science, and action, check out the free Health Outlook ezine.

 

Follow Alison Rose Levy on Twitter: www.twitter.com/healthattitude

Comments

[Sheldon101]

Ms. Levy:

We've clashed on Eleanor Roosevelt's spirit, your modelling yourself on it and my view that your position on vaccination meant you weren't following the spirit, the ethics of Mrs. Roosevelt. So we're disagreeing on the ethics of vaccination.

You've called for a more civilized and focused dialogue, Agreed. Let's start here with an entry titled, "The Ethics and Morality of Voluntary H1N1 Vaccination."

To make the dialogue useful, everyone AGREES with or ASSUMES or PRETENDS the following is true: (1)the virus is killing and injuring children and adults and especially pregnant women, (2)there's a 1 in a million chance vaccinatin will result in serious harm ) the vaccine is effective in preventing infection both in those at high risk and almost everyone else vaccinated and (4), if the virus mutates and becomes more dangerous, the vaccine will still be effective.

Anyone can begin.THE CDC's INFORMATION IS WRONG, BUT FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS DIALOGUE, I WILL PRETEND IT IS CORRECT, before continuing

Is this a trap?
No, it's a neglected area of discussion on H1N1. Yes, it's a trap because it isn't hard to forsee the results of the dialogue. And that leads to the next ethical question: Don't those with a soapbox have a duty to discuss the ethics of a topic when it is so central to the topic itself.

I hope to see a blog entry as discussed above in the near future.
Yours sincerely,
sheldon101

[mofmars333]

Gary Null Speaking Out at the NYS Assembly Hearing | 10-13-2009 | (part 1 of 3)

Are you listening Obama Administration?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3XlJB7J5-o&feature=related

Read & learn more from the comments at;

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/24/obama-declares-swine-flu_n_332617.html#postComment

[Alison Rose Levy - Huffpost Blogger]

Hi Everyone:

I'm so glad that there has been an active discussion here and I thank all of you have engaged in this and offered additional links to helpful information, as well as your own deeply felt perspectives. Let me tell you that I really resonate with the thoughtful and heartfelt comments coming from those on both sides of the issue.

I want to say a little more about my intention in writing this blog which I may also address in future blogs, based two decades of reporting on health and psychology, as well as thirty years in the mass media.

When there is a controversy like this, naturally people feel strongly about their views, and both sides have good reasons to feel the way they do, Neither view can nor should be overlooked.

Whether it's international policy towards other nations, relationships with others, or how we frame an important matter of health care policy, fighting to the death with someone who does not agree with you will rarely help to resolve the problem. Some emotional intelligence needs to be brought to this debate. This is not just about molecules -- peoples' lives are at stake here.

In my experience, I've never seen that people are helped or an issue is resolved, by drawing lines in the sand, and adopting and an I am right and you are wrong attitude. The real solution always come from hearing the other side.

[Alison Rose Levy - Huffpost Blogger]

Whether you're concerned about the protection vaccinations can provide, are a firm believer in the authority of evidence-based research, or are suffering because loved ones have been injured and your concerns are not being recognized, and addressed by science, I feel that you deserve to be heard. But I would like to create a context for people with different views to hear each other openly and open-mindedly so that a resolution that meets everyone's needs can be found.

That was my goal in writing this blog-- to try to find a common ground that will meet the needs of both sides. If you care about this issue on either side, that is what you should care about too.

So instead of repeating the same kinds of comments, accusations, and references that I know many of you have already shared elsewhere, and will no doubt share again, why not take me up on the challenge I issue to both sides. Is there a way that we can screen those at risk for adverse reactions? If we can, then that would meet some needs on both sides.

If you are interested in engaging in that kind of exchange with others who may not agree to you, please sign up at: www.health-journalist.com and I will try to create a forum for those who would like to heal this situation rather than just proving that they are right.

Thanks to all,

Alison

[mofmars333]

Thank you Alison, I hope everyone takes this good advise, I know I am.

I signed up & will help gather others on my way through these blogs spreading what I know as truth, because it's a great idea & we need this.

[TanzaniteDiamonds]

Thanks Alison. The link isn't working right now. I'll try again later.

Speaking of "allergies", I find it interesting that very little mention, if any, has been made about individuals who have an egg allergy -- when it comes to this personal decision --about getting vaccinated.

Doctors may not (at least, I know my Doctor won't) vaccinate patients with an egg allergy. So, sometimes there are those of us -- who have an immune system -- that contributes to making this decision for us, whether we want to be vaccinated or not.

[StThomas]

This sounds OK, superficially, but the danger of looking at all sides in this way assumes that all sides have equal merit or even some merit, which in the case of vaccinate/don't vaccinate facing most parents just isn't true. How to find out who may have any kind bad reaction to a vaccine, well that's a research question, and not one that will be answerable outside an academic Immunology department. Since such things are so rare, beyound feeling unwell for a few days, probably not a lot of milage in that. In the meantime, I think you may be ignoring the joy of argument and of testing your wits and knowledge. We're not all as repetitive as some you'll see here!

[Sheldon101]

Some people opposed to vaccination can be reached by evidence and reason..

For the rest, their explanation come down to this miasmatic feeling that there's evil doing's out there aiming to hurt them. Discussing the issues when them is as useful as arguing with a dining room table.

[cable1977]

Discussing with people who disagree with you is good, up to a point. It is good if the arguments being made are rational, fact-based, and logical. However, if the arguments are irrational and filled with rhetoric and propaganda, then how can you have a productive conversation? At what point does the discussion become like talking to the Birthers who feel Obama is not a legitimate president, despite any factual evidence to back up their claims.

Common ground is good. I can agree that vaccines should be tested and we should use the best information available to us to understand their efficacy and safety. However, quite a few individuals that I have gone back and worth with are of the mindset that vaccines are both extremely unsafe and completely uneffective, despite that vast amount of scientific literature showing otherwise to both counts.

Furthermore, how do you have a discussion when any argument against the point that vaccines are unsafe and ineffective is simply considered part of a vast conspiracy designed to make pharmaceutical companies profit while destroying our children? How do you have a rational discussion when those kind of statements are what you must argue against?

[mofmars333]

Should I get the new H1N1 vaccine?

"Are there any downsides or risks associated with the new swine flu vaccine?

With many people asking that question, we have compiled a list of frequently asked questions - along with some less frequently asked ones.

This article will help the reader to make an informed decision about the risks and benefits of getting vaccinated."

http://www.thevaccination.com/article/2/Should-I-get-the-new-H1N1-vaccine.html

[cable1977]

No it won't. It will help you make the wrong decision based on propaganda, rhetoric, bad science, and no evidence.

[mofmars333]

I think the people are well able to decide for themselves what's propaganda& rhetoric & what's not.

Read & learn more from the comments at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/16/mandatory-flu-vaccines-fo_n_323923.html?show_comment_id=33374563#comment_33374563

[euthman]

In summary: assertions, generalizations, and speculation... and 100% evidence-free!

[cable1977]

The anti-vaccination motto. They should make T-shirts...or coffee mugs.

[mofmars333]

Raggedy Ann's creation had roots due to a very probable vaccination death of a little girl.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Raggedy Ann is a fictional character created by writer Johnny Gruelle (1880–1938) in a series of books he wrote and illustrated for young children.

Gruelle created Raggedy Ann for his daughter, Marcella, when she brought him an old hand-made rag doll and he drew a face on it.

Marcella died at age 13 after being vaccinated at school for smallpox without her parents' consent. Authorities blamed a heart defect, but her parents blamed the vaccination. Gruelle became an opponent of vaccination, and the Raggedy Ann doll was used as a symbol by the anti-vaccination movement.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raggedy_Ann#cite_note-0

[cable1977]

Very probable? How can you possibly claim that this girl died from the smallpox vaccination? They barely did autopsies back then and even when they did had nowhere near the modern technology that exists today. But you know for sure cause the interwebs told you.

Just because her parent's blamed the vaccination doesn't make it true.

[mofmars333]

"Just because her parent's blamed the vaccination doesn't make it true."

It never does, does it?

But soon, all voices will be heard on this matter & will count.

[mofmars333]

The Pharmaceutical Industrial Complex: A Deadly Fairy Tale

by Dr. Doug Henderson and Dr. Gary Null

http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=15758

Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/16/swine-flu-shots-revive-a-_n_323503.html?show_comment_id=33353344#comment_33353344

[StThomas]

Gary Null, and Mercola below here. You'll be quoting whale.to next!. Those who will agree with you are already converted. You lower your credibility in the eyes of your foes, and if I want to convinve anyone in the middle, I only need to get them to read the sites you quote with an open mind

[mofmars333]

Ten Swine Flu Lies Told by the Mainstream Media

http://www.naturalnews.com/027055_swine_flu_vaccines_swine_flu_vaccine.html

[mofmars333]

Are Vaccines Safe?

Bracing Ourselves for More Sham Vaccine Studies

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=15669

[mofmars333]

CBS Reveals that Swine Flu Cases Seriously Overestimated

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2009/10/24/CBS-Reveals-that-Swine-Flu-Cases-Seriously-Overestimated.aspx

Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/23/us-swine-flu-deaths-surpa_n_332360.html?show_comment_id=33360220#comment_33360220

[mofmars333]

Update on Washington Redskin cheer leader who received seasonal flu vaccine

http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=mh5F5wP8RdU

Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/23/us-swine-flu-deaths-surpa_n_332360.html?show_comment_id=33360220#comment_33360220

[mofmars333]

Autism Increase Environmental Not Genetic – Says New Director of USA’s $30.5 Billion Health Research Budget

http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/2009/10/24/autismenvironmental/

[StThomas]

How could autism possibly be relevant on a vaccine thread?

(lights the blue touchpaper, and retires directly!)

[bbaker2580]

autism has been linked to vaccination as a root cause

[EliminateVariables]

An Epidemic of Fear: How Panicked Parents Skipping Shots Endangers Us All

http://www.wired.com/magazine/2009/10/ff_waronscience/all/1

Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alison-rose-levy/a-guide-for-the-perplexed_b_327242.html
__________­__________­__________­__________­__________­__________­__________­__

This story is done so poorly it has been dissed out and made fun of as of late.

Apparently, a magazine exclusive to electronics, gadgets and hardware suddenlty has the expertise and intelligence to write such a poorly done story that does not use one shred of fact of evidence to back up any of it's claims.

Read the reviews from other journalists and Industry experts and they pick it apart with glee.

I suppose they are suffereing in the real world and would like Pharmaceutical ads to make up it's bulk of advertising. Watch, in the next year they will have Lipitor and prozac ads.

I seriously hope someone does not base their theory on this matter by a poorly done pro vaccine story done by a tech and gadget magazine.

[tarowig]

Your comments can easily be transferred to the less than credible sources provided here by people who are antivaccination. Please provide links to reviews from "other journalists and industry experts" too as I would be interested in seeing them - especially those from reputable sources (not just links to youtube videos and the like).
BTW - Lipitor and prozac advertisments already exist, as do ads for other prescription medicines.

[Hirnlego]

An Epidemic of Fear: How Panicked Parents Skipping Shots Endangers Us All

http://www.wired.com/magazine/2009/10/ff_waronscience/all/1

[mofmars333]

Please read the comments at this misleading article so you can be informed with what the truth is.

I do hope some vaccines have been beneficial because certainly many people have suffered & still are due to the living nightmare they're in.

I would hope the sacrifices of many injuries & death were worth it but I doubt it at this point.

Vaccines Did Not Save Us – 2 Centuries of Official Statistics

http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/graphs/

[Hirnlego]

I'm in the skeptic society. If anyone puts these things through a scientific examination then its the skeptics... not people who are into pseudo-science.

Read here:
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/

[Hypersapien]

Do you define 'misleading' in any way other than that you, personally, disagree with it?

[mofmars333]

Please help truth out here to counter the disinformation that's gathering there.

Our children are too important not to;

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/maria-rodale/swine-flu-is-in-the-house_b_331719.html