# U.S. policy toward baby formula- making our babies sick, fat, and stupid? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 5, 2003, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-policy-toward-baby-formula-making-our-babies-sick-fat-and-stupid/146799 "2003-01-05T18:56:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![SuaSponte](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/67e7ee/32.png) [@SuaSponte](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SuaSponte)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2003, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-policy-toward-baby-formula-making-our-babies-sick-fat-and-stupid/146799/101 "2003-01-09T16:33:53Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Cessandra \* > To start with I do understand religious freedom. Your analogy of driving is incorrect, driving is not a right, it is a privilege. Education is a right, the government cannot require that you violate your religious beliefs in order to recieve an education. This is what has been decided by the courts. If you assert that you understand religious freedom better than the courts, then maybe you should look twice at yourself. Oh, this is funny. **Cessandra,** cite, please? It appears that your knowledge of constitutional law is about as comprehensive as your knowledge about vaccinations. :rolleyes: To the extent education is a right in some places and instances (education is not a federal right, and is protected only by some state constitutions), it ain’t just your kid’s right, it is the right of all the other children in that classroom. And if your child’s exercise of religious freedom interferes with those other student’s right to an effective and safe education, your religious right loses. To give a simple (and absurd) example, even if your religious beliefs required females under the age of 18 to be topless during daylight hours, your 16 year old daughter is not going to be allowed to attend highschool with her boobs hanging out. She will be a distraction to the class and will detract from the education of the other students. Either she clothes herself or she gets homeschooled. Your child presents a more serious potential to disrupt the other students’ education - if your child is in the classroom, the other students’ chances of getting sick or dying has increased. Being sick or dead makes it harder to get a diploma. So your kid should be out of the classroom. > [@](#): > > I read many things before making my decision on vaccination, in fact there are a large number of parents who made the same decision I did. Many people did a lot of reading and decided to invest in Enron because Venus was in Cancer. > [@](#): > > The nurse who works for my childrens’ pediatrician doesn’t vaccinate her children and she works in the healthcare profession. And this is evidence of what? My sister and brother-in-law are both pediatrician, and would shoot me if I decided I wasn’t going to vaccinate my (hypothetical) kids. Do two pediatricians beat a nurse? Or is your resort to anecdote a tacit acknowledgement that that you have jack to base your decision on but a mystical belief in pseudoscience and a breathtaking callousness about the health of the children you expose your child to? > [@](#): > > The pediatrician himself does not push vaccination on parents, he believes it is their decision. I still have you beat on anecdotal evidence, two pediatricians to a pediatrician and a nurse. > [@](#): > > The books I have read are written, for the most part, by doctors. A large number of those being pediatricians. You might take a step back and look at the very sources you cite and ask why you believe them without ever questioning them. To turn the question around, why do **you** fail to question the writings of the quacks you so unblinkingly believe? My “unquestioning” acceptance of the medical wisdom is based on two things: (1) the statistics demonstrating the massive drops in the incidence of measles, whooping cough, rubella, mumps, etc. since vaccination became wide-spread, and (2) the fact that the scientific method has been demonstrated to work over the past 5 centuries. What has also been demonstrated over the centuries is that there are quacks in every profession - and always suckers who believe their piffle, to their own detriment. > [@](#): > > The CDC utilizes scare tactics more than any of the other sources I have read, even the hardcore anti-vaccination groups. “If you don’t get your children vaccinated, they could get sick or die.” Damn that CDC!! > [@](#): > > The pharmaceutical lobby is one of the largest in the nation, and yet you seem to think that everything the government says is the gospel truth on this subject, Jesus Christ, and you claim you have read and are knowledgeable on this issue. Yet you apparently do not know that vaccines are not a profitable product for pharmaceutical companies - just about all of them are off-patent and the profit margins are low because it is a commodized, mass product. Indeed, without government subsidy, most pharmaceutical companies would stop making them. Try reading books with facts in them. > [@](#): > > while I have seen many of you try to prove the government dead wrong in other threads. You would do well to step back and take a good look at what you are espousing as being informed. 😕 What does this mean, that if I disagree with the government once, I have to disagree with them all the time? Or do I have your permission to analyze the government’s motive in determining whether they are being untruthful or not? And the government **has no motive** to lie on this issue. Your proferred conspiracy theory, er, explanation, is that the government lies because the pharmaceutical lobby tells them to. But, as I noted, Big Pharma doesn’t make money on vaccinations, so that argument is road-kill. > [@](#): > > Some of my best friends children got chicken pox, after being vaccinated, as did the majority of their school. I recognize that this is little more than anecdotal proof, but so was everything else cited in this thread. The fact is, vaccinations do not always work, and are not 100% safe. Yes. And…? > [@](#): > > I made my choice and have only asked that it be respected. Sorry, no can do. I have to accept it; I don’t have to respect it. Why would you want me to ‘respect’ something that I think is amazingly selfish and dumb. > [@](#): > > I respect your choice to vaccinate and do not think you are an idiot for doing so, you simply came to a different conclusion than I did. I could be defensive and swear you didn’t understand what you read, accuse you of being an idiot, and post all sorts of information, but I do not. Good for you. But, chile, you decided to defend an indefensible decision in Great Debates. You want to avoid condemnation for your foolish actions, don’t proudly speak of them in Great Debates. > [@](#): > > Further, you refuse to accept that perhaps I know more about my children, and what is best for them, than you do. Even HennaDancer has come to understand that many parents have reasons for choosing formula that she didn’t consider. Is it really necessary for me to reveal my childrens’ particular medical reasons that keep me from vaccinating? Suddenly, your child is not vaccinated because of particular medical problems. Throughout this thread, your position is that you were against vaccination. If you are in favor of vaccinations except where there are contradictions, why are we having this debate? > [@](#): > > Or will you finally accept that my husband and I are their parents and it is OUR job, not YOURS, to make those decisions for them? I’ve never disputed that; I’m not **HennaDancer,** trying to impose anything on you. Vaccinate, don’t vaccinate, I don’t care. What I do care about is that, if you don’t vaccinate, you don’t threaten the health of other children by your decision. So keep them out of my schools. > [@](#): > > I do not feel a need to defend my decisions any further. I have made my choice and your scare tactics are not going to change my mind. Fine. **KEEP YOUR KIDS OUT OF MY SCHOOLS.** Whatever else you do is up to you. > [@](#): > > You have degraded me, accused me of putting other people at risk, and made me out to be un-educated. None of this is in the least bit true. I am now very thankful that you are not running this country and that we still have some freedom left! Honey, you made two major factual errors in this post alone. That is evidence of your lack of education on this issue. BTW, kindly point out where I have degraded you. And, again, I have not one tried to deny you any freedoms. I have no problem from a legal perspective with your decision. I would like to prevent you from depriving other children of the right to good health and education. That’s called being a defender of freedoms, not an attacker of freedoms. Sua ---
**Author:** ![SuaSponte](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/67e7ee/32.png) [@SuaSponte](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SuaSponte)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2003, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-policy-toward-baby-formula-making-our-babies-sick-fat-and-stupid/146799/102 "2003-01-09T16:35:07Z")
Ack. “contraindications.” ---
**Author:** ![Cyn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a88e4f/32.png) [@Cyn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cyn)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2003, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-policy-toward-baby-formula-making-our-babies-sick-fat-and-stupid/146799/103 "2003-01-09T17:09:41Z")
At the hospital where I work as a Labor & Delivery RN, our Lactation Specialists are RNs, but new moms don’t see them until at least several hours after baby is delivered. I am the person the new mom has bonded with and trusts. I’ve been with her, answering her questions and teaching her how to care for herself and her baby. At my hospital the patient Care Specialist is not a nurse and does not visit patients while they are admitted. The Lactation RNs do try to visit all nursing moms and they are smilingly referred to as BoobNazis by many of the staff for their zeal and focus. I asked many RNs, LSs, pediatricians, OB-Gyn doctors and head nurses what they thought about perscription formula and to varying degrees all agreed it was not a good idea. The potential abuses far outweigh the benefits to baby. ---
**Author:** ![Mort\_Furd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/8e8cbc/32.png) [@Mort\_Furd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mort_Furd)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2003, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-policy-toward-baby-formula-making-our-babies-sick-fat-and-stupid/146799/104 "2003-01-09T17:23:13Z")
Cessandra, you should really be glad that more people don’t make the decision you did. Check [here](http://www.sabin.org/news_apr16.htm) and [here](http://www.vaccinationnews.com/DailyNews/April2002/MeaslesOutbreakGermanyDocsFault.htm) for a little view of what could happen. Please note that Germans are springing onto the anti-vaccination bandwagon in droves. Nearly every parent I’ve met has voiced a strong dislike for vaccinations and most of them have skipped some of the needed vaccinations because of their unreasoning fears. Also note the numbers. There were 13 cases of **possible** adverse reaction to the MMR vaccine reported in Germany (with millions of vaccinations made) for the whole year as opposed to the Coburg district (population of less than 100,000) with 1000 cases of the measles. Do your neighbors a favor and keep your (potentially) disease spreading children at home. BTW: My children are both immunized according to the time tables that the pediatricians here use. I do not want them to contract some nasty disease because some non-immunized feather head traveled in a third world country (which folks here do quite often on vacation) and brought back some nasties to spread around at home. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2003, 10:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-policy-toward-baby-formula-making-our-babies-sick-fat-and-stupid/146799/105 "2003-01-10T22:34:18Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by CrankyAsAnOldMan \* > \*\*Now we’re going into vaccinations, too, I see. > > For the record, I’d like Dr. Deth and Mort Furd to know that my doctor’s entire practice doesn’t agree with the CDC recommendation and my state’s regulation for at least once vaccine: varicella. They aren’t quacks, either. Hardly the bastions of ignorance and irrationality. > > My son has all his shots but that one. Herd immunity concerns (and state law) will require him to get it soon, but we all thought it was better to wait as long as possible, and if it weren’t for those factors we’d put it off indefinitely. > > Let us not use such a wide brush when painting vaccine skeptics. \*\* If you read my first post in this subject, I allowed that an informed parent- after consultation with their Doctor- might well decide to skip one or so of the recommended vaccinations (or, better- put it off, as you did). This is an “informed choice”. However, skipping ALL of them (assuming we don’t have a child with advanced AIDs, etc) cannot possibly be an “informed” choice. It can only be an ignorant & dangerous choice. The CDC does allow for individual choice & accepts personal physicians recommendation on a case-by-case basis. I commend you on your well thought out & informed choice. For others-Another example might be that one of your children had a very bad allergic reaction with one of the vaccinations. Consulation with your pediatrician on whether or not to give that child’s sibling the very same shot would be indicated. Henna- the CDC site covers the Mercury/Thimersol question quite carefully. The product is “generally safe”, and is also being phased out. Again, INFORMED parents, who might know their child has allerigic reaction to Mercury Compounds, would likely so inform their doctor, and get a vaccination without that compound. This is “informed”. I would say that you wouldn’t be “crazy” if your concern about the possible dangers had you consult with your pediatrician & see if alternatives were available. Cessandra- since you were the one who cited the CDC in the first palce, you really can’t just throw out their information because it contradicts your half-baked & superstitious ideas. (Note here- I am calling her “opinion” on vaccinations “half-baked & superstitious”. Not her personally.) In fact, they are generally recognized as being just about the most informative & fair site around- as they don’t sell drugs. ect and are unbiased. Note that they do have several caveats & warnings about vaccinations. But in general- they are strongly in favor of them. Mort- good point. In fact the CDC cites three nations where child vaccinations of Pertussis were cut back- and they had a “dramatic & immediate” epidemic of Pertussis, including far too many child deaths. ---
**Author:** ![CrankyAsAnOldMan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crankyasanoldman/32/11670_2.png) [@CrankyAsAnOldMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CrankyAsAnOldMan)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2003, 2:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-policy-toward-baby-formula-making-our-babies-sick-fat-and-stupid/146799/106 "2003-01-11T02:21:29Z")
Dr. Deth, I apologize for not reading your first post more carefully. There is still something to take away from the example I brought up, however. That is that the CDC may not be completely unbiased or reliable. I am saying this based on their strong recommendation for varicella–a vaccine whose usefulness might be questionable. Certainly some doctors question it. Of course, once a majority of kids get the vaccine, they pretty much all have to because of the risk of not getting it in childhood due to lack of exposure (chicken pox as an adult is worse and more dangerous). Maybe that influences the CDC’s current recommendation; I don’t know. I think also the CDC really dropped the ball on AIDS when it first was identified, but I might be misremembering. The bottom line is, I’d trust the CDC information over a random website, or people who practice some kind of pseudoscience to justify their preferences. BUT I also have to recognize that not all issues are cut and dried, and the CDC is fallible. ---
**Author:** ![artemis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/91b2a8/32.png) [@artemis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/artemis)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2003, 5:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-policy-toward-baby-formula-making-our-babies-sick-fat-and-stupid/146799/107 "2003-01-11T05:56:17Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by CrankyAsAnOldMan \* > **Certainly some doctors question it. Of course, once a majority of kids get the vaccine, they pretty much all have to because of the risk of not getting it in childhood due to lack of exposure (chicken pox as an adult is worse and more dangerous). Maybe that influences the CDC’s current recommendation; I don’t know.** It is definitely influencing their recommendation, especially since vaccination rates typically drop off dramatically once people leave school (ask most adults whether they’ve kept up-to-date on their tetanus shots, or have gotten a flu vaccine or Pneumovax, and all you get is a blank stare) - so those kids who aren’t vaccinated AND who don’t manage to catch chickenpox before late adolescence are in real danger of “slipping through the cracks”, placing them at risk of catching chickenpox as adults. The CDC recommendations might be different if we could actually rely on people vaccinating their kids at age 16 if they hadn’t caught chickenpox by then. \*\* > [@](#): > > I think also the CDC really dropped the ball on AIDS when it first was identified, but I might be misremembering.\*\* In what way? I think you’re probably confusing the actions of the CDC (which played a major role in working out the epidemeology of the disease) with the (non)action of most of the officials in the Reagan Administration, who (with the notable exception of Surgeon General Koop) were reluctant to acknowledge the existence of AIDS at all. \*\* > [@](#): > > The bottom line is, I’d trust the CDC information over a random website, or people who practice some kind of pseudoscience to justify their preferences. BUT I also have to recognize that not all issues are cut and dried, and the CDC is fallible. \*\* Not much is cut and dried in medicine, that’s for sure. I wish it were - it would make my life much easier. ---
**Author:** ![MsRobyn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/90ced4/32.png) [@MsRobyn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MsRobyn)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2003, 12:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-policy-toward-baby-formula-making-our-babies-sick-fat-and-stupid/146799/108 "2003-01-11T12:32:36Z")
On the issue of vaccinations, I’m going to say this, and then shut up. As far as I’m concerned, an individual’s rights not to vaccinate stop where the health and safety of me and my family begin. Had I been exposed to someone with rubella (and this happened to an acquaintance of mine), Aaron could have been miscarried or born profoundly deaf. Fortunately, my parents, pediatrician and the U.S. Navy thought enough of vaccinating against it that I am immune. If someone’s unvaccinated child comes into contact with Aaron, who has not had all his shots yet, the effects can be devastating. Not all diseases are fatal, but there can be some pretty icky side effects and permanent damage. Look. We’ve got two hundred and fifty plus years of history, and an awful lot of supporting evidence that vaccination is a good thing. There aren’t huge populations injured by the stuff, and it’s pretty effective in wiping out diseases that used to routinely maim or kill. Think about that. Robin [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-policy-toward-baby-formula-making-our-babies-sick-fat-and-stupid/146799.md?page=5)