Kingwood Underground
the heart and soul of our Kingwood, Texas family
Login - Create Account - Help
Clean out your garage on Kingwood bookoo! Or find local garage sales on Yard Sale Search.com
KU Live!

anti-vaccination movement causes newborn issues including death!

who's talking here?

Fiona 2
sunshine1881 1
* 1
AFWife 3
Perfection 2
FANCY PANTS 7
Hiro Protagonist 2
voice of reason 4
AwesomeTattooedDragon 4
gawdawful 1
Let Logic Prevail 4
Dorothy Parker 1
Joe Blow 1
WatchOut 3
sheddy 1
DVaz 1
The Day I Tried to Live 3
mutton 3
Kayry 3
jacobson 10
RayofHope 1
Elsa 2
Big D 4
thesweetness 1

     » send to friend     » save in my favorites     » flag dangerous topic flag as a dangerous topic

voice of reason --- 4 years ago -

Anti-Vaccination Movement Could Be Prompting Parents to Skip Other Important Shot

The anti-vaccination movement might be behind a new disturbing trend of parents refusing a lifesaving vitamin injection for their newborns.

Late last year, doctors at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tenn., began diagnosing several infants with a rare bleeding disorder caused by a vitamin K deficiency that affects 1 in 100,000 babies. By May, they had seen seven cases in eight months, as reported by The Tennessean. The relative spike in occurrences, they soon discovered, was related to the parents' refusal of a simple shot given right after birth.

Newborns are naturally deficient in vitamin K, the vitamin that causes blood to coagulate. Mothers do not pass enough vitamin K to their child in the womb, nor is there a sufficient amount in breast milk. The lack of this vital nutrient increases the risk of vitamin K deficiency bleeding (VKDB), a condition that causes internal bleeding and can lead to brain damage and death.

VKDB is rare, thanks in large part to the fact that it is easy to prevent. A simple vitamin K shot in the leg within 24 hours after birth will protect infants from the bleeding disorder. As Chris Mooney noted in an article for Mother Jones, the shot has been in regular use since 1961, when the American Academy of Pediatrics first recommended it. Yet a growing number of parents are refusing the shot for their newborns.

Dr. Robert Sidonio, a Vanderbilt pediatrician who has been tracking their VKDB cases, believes the increase in parents deciding against the vitamin K shot is part of the general anti-vaccine movement. As for who is refusing vitamin K for their babies, "The group includes people who are fairly liberal and those with strong religious beliefs," Sidonio told Yahoo Health. "It's not purely a religious objection like most people think. And unfortunately, there are a lot of bad websites that are spreading misinformation."


To further complicate things, the vitamin K shot has become a victim of its own success. "This shot is a casualty of perfect public-health policy," said Sidonio. "It's very inexpensive, widely used, and highly effective. And because there are rarely any cases [of VKDB], parents had never heard of it, so people begin to wonder why they should have the shot at all."

Sidonio said that there have been no new VKDB cases at Vanderbilt's hospital since May thanks to the local media coverage and better communication between healthcare providers and families. Though he added that he's heard about other VKDB cases in St. Louis and Washington state. "The problem is that there isn't a national tracking system in the United States, so it's difficult to keep tabs on what's happening elsewhere," Sidonio explained.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports that infants who do not receive the shot are 81 times more likely to develop VKDB than those who receive the shot. The risk still remains low for those who do not get the shot, approximately 4 to 7 infants out of 100,000. 

FANCY PANTS --- 4 years ago -

As I read this I wonder if there is any risk in getting the shot. So, I researched it and found this: The Potential Dark Side of the Routine Newborn Vitamin K Shot, Link: http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/03/27/high-risks-to-your-baby-from-vitamin-k-shot-they-dont-warn-you-about.aspx


For those who will not read the article it states: ORAL Vitamin K Is a Safe & Effective Method to Deliver Necessary Vitamin K. It is the shot that is dangerous because of the toxins in the shot. 

sheddy --- 4 years ago -

There are other things these parents need to worry about if they aren't going to vaccinate their children. If all these people keep crossing into the USA, those kids could be in real danger of coming down with all kinds of terrible diseases. 

voice of reason --- 4 years ago -

the oral method is via breast milk but the mother doesn't have enough to transfer that way and there are still deaths. that's the way i read it anyway.

from your article:
Giving newborns a syringe full of vitamin K may cause psychological trauma, give infants 20,000 times more vitamin K dose than what is needed, and create an environment for infections to occur.
There are safer ways to raise vitamin K levels in newborns; giving vitamin K orally is one way. While breastfeeding enables mothers to transfer low doses of vitamin K to their child, this will depend on the mother?s vitamin K levels.


whereas the original article also states:
Newborns are naturally deficient in vitamin K, the vitamin that causes blood to coagulate. Mothers do not pass enough vitamin K to their child in the womb, nor is there a sufficient amount in breast milk. The lack of this vital nutrient increases the risk of vitamin K deficiency bleeding (VKDB), a condition that causes internal bleeding and can lead to brain damage and death. 

voice of reason --- 4 years ago -

To further complicate things, the vitamin K shot has become a victim of its own success. "This shot is a casualty of perfect public-health policy," said Sidonio. "It's very inexpensive, widely used, and highly effective. And because there are rarely any cases [of VKDB], parents had never heard of it, so people begin to wonder why they should have the shot at all."


this is also the reason some think it is safe to not vaccinate. mark my word they will all change their tune as the unvaccinated start to again acquire deadly diseases. morons.

backwards science. or should i say backwoods science. 

FANCY PANTS --- 4 years ago -

This is not about who vaccinates and who doe not. It is about a better way to deliver a needed dose of vitamin K to newborns without the toxins of a shot. If I had to decide between a oral dose and a shot I would choose the oral dose. No reason to inject a newborn with unnecessary junk. 

voice of reason --- 4 years ago -

FANCY can't you read? there is NO ORAL DOSE AVAILABLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 

Kayry --- 4 years ago -

This is very interesting reading as my sis-in-law and her husband do not vaccinate their kids at all. Her husband is a Chiropractor and convinced her as long as she is able to breast feed the kids during infancy/early toddlerhood that that is enough and their bodies will heal themselves!

@Sheddy you bring up excellent points with all the illegals coming over and potentially spreading all kinds of crap. 

thesweetness --- 4 years ago -

@Sheddy you bring up excellent points with all the illegals coming over and potentially spreading all kinds of crap.

Hey and you know what else?? Mr. Roberts was a SEAL 

sunshine1881 --- 4 years ago -

@Sheddy you bring up excellent points with all the illegals coming over and potentially spreading all kinds of crap.

Don't let those pesky facts get in the way of your rhetoric, as usual. 

FANCY PANTS --- 4 years ago -

FANCY can't you read? there is NO ORAL DOSE AVAILABLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?

I did not say one was available, did I? I said:
If I had to decide between a oral dose and a shot I would choose the oral dose.

Why inject your baby with toxins if you do not have to. I'm sure that they will soon offer oral vitamin K so they can make the money off the one that do not want the injection. 

AwesomeTattooedDragon --- 4 years ago -

I still think not getting your kids vaccinated is a mistake- kids died from these diseases before there were vaccines- 

AFWife --- 4 years ago -

And kids are dying from vaccines that aren't needed. There are necessary ones but no good logic why kids get triple the vaccines then they did 30 years ago. It's all about the $$$$ 

mutton --- 4 years ago -

And some vaccines just were not avail 30 years ago... 

Dorothy Parker --- 4 years ago -

I trust my doctor more than google.

I believe in vaccines and keeping my kids healthy.

I also believe in not being a risk to those with compromised immune systems. 

Perfection --- 4 years ago -

I know I'm not an infant but I do take an oral dose of Vitamin K, to the tune of $3800 a month for the rest of my life.

Vitamin K deficiency is nothing to sneeze at 

jacobson --- 4 years ago -

FANCY can't you read? there is NO ORAL DOSE AVAILABLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?

Wrong again. There are oral doses available. 

Perfection --- 4 years ago -

Not for newborns jacobson 

The Day I Tried to Live --- 4 years ago -

Not for newborns jacobson

"There are safer ways to raise vitamin K levels in newborns; giving vitamin K orally is one way. While breastfeeding enables mothers to transfer low doses of vitamin K to their child, this will depend on the mother?s vitamin K levels."

According to:

The Potential Dark Side of the Routine Newborn Vitamin K Shot 

Elsa --- 4 years ago -

The only reason I chose to vaccinate was because we live in an area with a lot of undocumented people. I was not comfortable with the regular schedule. Dr. Sears wrote a book on vaccinations and suggested an alternative schedule. I followed that one and I am very happy I did.

My kids never got more than two vaccines at a time. My kids have now had all of the vaccines, we just took a little longer to get them all in. 

WatchOut --- 4 years ago -

Why inject your baby with toxins if you do not have to. I'm sure that they will soon offer oral vitamin K so they can make the money off the one that do not want the injection.


No they will not:
"Why would oral prophylaxis not work? There are just too many variables. Adherence to the recommended regimen may be poor for a variety of reasons. A child may be ill and vomiting, or on antibiotics which interfere with gut production by killing off intestinal flora. A family may simply forget. The amount of vitamin K in the breast milk may be affected by external factors as well. So while oral vitamin K may be cheaper and does not cause any procedural discomfort, and it may be better than none at all, the evidence supports intramuscular prophylaxis, especially when you consider the potential outcomes of late VKDB. Some countries that switched to oral regimens have seen spikes in the incidence of late VKDB, and Australia switched back to intramuscular. Of note, premature infants must receive intramuscular dosing because of poor absorption of oral formulations. Also, liquid oral vitamin K is not available in the United States."

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/separating-fact-from-fiction-in-the-not-so-normal-newborn-nursery-vitamin-k-shots/ 

WatchOut --- 4 years ago -

"There are safer ways to raise vitamin K levels in newborns; giving vitamin K orally is one way. While breastfeeding enables mothers to transfer low doses of vitamin K to their child, this will depend on the mother?s vitamin K levels."


Nope. See my last post. 

WatchOut --- 4 years ago -

The only reason I chose to vaccinate was because we live in an area with a lot of undocumented people. I was not comfortable with the regular schedule.




LOL As if undocumented people are only what spread disease prevented by vaccinations! If all you morons out there don't vaccinate your kids, they will be the reason the disease spread. Your kids will be as disease ridden as the undocs!

Don't you get that?! LOL 

FANCY PANTS --- 4 years ago -

Thank God moms can boost their vitamin K levels before birth and during breast feeding. Vitamin K-1 administered several days before birth has beneficial effects on the relative prothrombin deficiency commonly seen in neonates. When given orally to nursing mothers vitamin K-1 is easily passed through the breast milk to the infant and can reduce the risk of hypoprothrombenemia in breast fed infants. 

jacobson --- 4 years ago -

Not for newborns jacobson?

Yes, there are. 

The Day I Tried to Live --- 4 years ago -

Nope. See my last post.

They may not be available in the US and they may not be as effective but they're available.

I agree with the herd mentality when it comes to vaccinations. It's all the people having their children vaccinated that protect the unvaccinated. When the scales finally tip in the opposite direction we will start to see a lot of the childhood diseases that we thought to have eliminated. 

jacobson --- 4 years ago -

If all you morons out there don't vaccinate your kids, they will be the reason the disease spread.

A person can still get a disease even if they have been vaccinated. Vaccinations reduce the chance, but they aren't 100% perfect. 

FANCY PANTS --- 4 years ago -

I agree with the herd mentality when it comes to vaccinations.

Vaccines do not create herd immunity as they are only effective for 2-10 years. Doctors do not check to see if we are immune before re-vaccinating. Getting the disease is what causes herd immunity.

Today, pediatricians give American babies as many as 33 doses of 13 different vaccines by 12 months of age. It's too much and not necessary.

I have worked in the medical field for years and know that doctors and drug companies do not care if your child is damaged by a vaccine. They are much more concerned with the $$$. It is ignorant the think otherwise. 

The Day I Tried to Live --- 4 years ago -


I have worked in the medical field for years and know that doctors and drug companies do not care if your child is damaged by a vaccine.


What was your position in the medical field? 

Fiona --- 4 years ago -

A person can still get a disease even if they have been vaccinated. Vaccinations reduce the chance, but they aren't 100% perfect.?

thank you, Also your vaccinated child can pass a disease that they are vaccinated for even if they are not sick themselves. It amazes me that instead of just running tests to see what a child needs to be vaccinated for the drs just pump all of them in regardless if the child has a natural immunity passed by their mother. 

Elsa --- 4 years ago -

LOL As if undocumented people are only what spread disease prevented by vaccinations! If all you morons out there don't vaccinate your kids, they will be the reason the disease spread. Your kids will be as disease ridden as the undocs!

WatchOut, low class name calling doesn't hurt my feelings so don't worry yourself with that.

My sisters and I had the chicken pox all at the same time and we didn't die or suffer any ill effects...we had he measles too. We turned ok. lol

I don't trust the FDA all that much. They said thalidomide was OK for pregnant people..we see how that turned out. 

Hiro Protagonist --- 4 years ago -

Not for newborns jacobson?

Yes, there are.?



I don't think Jacobson understands how discussion boards work.

A normal person when they make an affirmative statement like above, they then post either a link or make some kind of statement showing how there is actually a newborn oral dose available.

Saying just "yes there are." Is the equivalent of children saying "is not"..... "is too" over and over again. 

Let Logic Prevail --- 4 years ago -

I don't think Jacobson understands how discussion boards work. A normal person when they make an affirmative statement like above, they then post either a link or make some kind of statement showing how there is actually a newborn oral dose available. Saying just "yes there are." Is the equivalent of children saying "is not"..... "is too" over and over again.



Spot on observation. 

Kayry --- 4 years ago -

Sorry ^^^lol^^^ 

Hiro Protagonist --- 4 years ago -


My sisters and I had the chicken pox all at the same time and we didn't die or suffer any ill effects...we had he measles too. We turned ok. lol




Brilliant thinking, just because it was o.k. for you doesn't mean there isn't serious consequences.


Before a vaccine was available, there was a rubella outbreak in the U.S. (1963 to 1964), during which 12 million people developed the disease. Because many of those infected were expectant mothers, 11,000 fetuses died and 20,000 babies were born with permanent disabilities as a result of exposure to the virus. The number of cases of rubella fell very sharply once the rubella vaccine was licensed in 1969; today there are fewer than 1,000 cases of rubella reported each year in the U.S. on average and less than 10 cases of congenital rubella syndrome. 

Kayry --- 4 years ago -

Also, even though you and your sister didn't suffer too much from the preventable diseases, doesn't mean others didn't suffer terribly!

I read an article written by a lady in her 30's I believe, talking about how her parents didn't believe in vaccines and as a result of it her and her siblings were hospitalized a few times due to getting so sick from the diseases. Her point was, no they obviously didn't die from said diseases, but they suffered TERRIBLY from the symptoms. 

Let Logic Prevail --- 4 years ago -

"Chickenpox (varicella) rarely causes complications, but it is not always harmless. It can cause hospitalization and, in rare cases, death. Fortunately, since the introduction of the vaccine in 1995, hospitalizations have declined by nearly 90%, and there have been few fatal cases of chickenpox.

"Adults have the greatest risk for dying from chickenpox, with infants having the next highest risk. Males (both boys and men) have a higher risk for a severe case of chickenpox than females. Children who catch chickenpox from family members are likely to have a more severe case than if they caught it outside the home. The older the child, the higher the risk for a more severe case. But even in such circumstances, chickenpox is rarely serious in children. Other factors put individuals at specifically higher risk for complications of chickenpox."


Then there's shingles.

The prevalent ignorance today is astounding. 

AFWife --- 4 years ago -

I believed the FDA that depo-provera was safe...permanent issues for the rest of my life are my future now. Now I don't trust them with anything. As I said before...it's all about the $$$, not your well being. 

jacobson --- 4 years ago -

A normal person when they make an affirmative statement like above, they then post either a link or make some kind of statement showing how there is actually a newborn oral dose available.

Then I guess you aren't normal, because you do the same thing all the time.

I didn't realize that you were so lazy that you couldn't do a little research yourself.

And Let Logic Prevail, you have no idea what a spot on observation is, otherwise you wouldn't have agreed with an idiotic statement.

The prevalent ignorance today is astounding.

Apparently that's true, since you are ignorant of the fact that a person can get shingles regardless of whether they've had chickenpox or not. 

jacobson --- 4 years ago -

Before a vaccine was available, there was a rubella outbreak in the U.S. (1963 to 1964), during which 12 million people developed the disease.

Where is the source of your plagiarism Randle? 

page 1 2
topic is locked.

see more discussions about...

children
health
recommendations


Online now:
hit counters

Terms of Service - Privacy Policy - Ice Box

Kingwood Underground