“Inoculation” and “vaccination” are synonyms for the introduction of antigenic material to form immunity to the disease. The word “inoculation” has another meaning, the so-called vegetative method of reproduction of plants, but we will not touch botany, it is not our topic.
As antigenic material can be used live, but weakened strains of microorganisms, killed microorganisms, purified material obtained from killed microorganisms-some of their proteins or other substances. the vaccine may be synthetic, when proteins peculiar to microorganisms are produced chemically, but such vaccines have not yet become widespread. They act weaker than” natural”, obtained by biological means, but have a significant advantage – synthetic vaccines do not contain impurities.
The question of whether or not to vaccinate has been stirring minds for many years. Hamlet’s famous ” to Be or not to be?”pales before” To do or not to vaccinate?”. With “be” to understand is much easier than with vaccinations.
And after all there were, there were Golden times when naive mankind did inoculations implicitly because believed in their advantage. Vaccinations it helped to defeat smallpox, it is, by the word.
But the time has come – and humanity (or rather-thinking part of it) split into two camps. Supporters of vaccinations continue to be vaccinated, and opponents – in every way avoid it. In every way-this is not an exaggeration. It comes to the point that children from “anti-vaccination” families are forced to move to home schooling, because in schools, and in children’s groups in General, access to unvaccinated children is limited.
So to do or not to do?
And in General, where is the truth, and what is the myth?
Actually, there are two myths about vaccination.
The first myth – vaccination clearly harmful, of no benefit to her does not happen and can not be.
Myth the second-vaccination unambiguously useful.
Don’t try to find a typo where there isn’t one.
Everything is exactly as it is written – there is a myth about the dangers of vaccination and, at the same time, there is a myth about its benefits. And do not look for the truth “somewhere in the middle”, in this case, as they say, ” not a ride.” There can be no middle ground. How to achieve it? Vaccinate every other week? Or to do them only in even years of life? Funny, isn’t it?
The fog was let loose notable, but nothing-now we will dispel it and expose both myths. In turn.
We will start with the myth of the dangers of vaccinations.
What arguments to justify their rightness are given by those who preach the rejection of vaccinations?
The first argument – vaccinations are an artificial stimulation of the immune system, and everything artificial is bad. Diseases have to be hurt in a natural way, in the mode that was planned by the mother nature.
The second argument – vaccinations cause a temporary immunity, which regularly need to “back up” through a new vaccination, and the transfer of disease naturally leads to the formation of lifelong immunity.
The third argument-vaccinations cause a failure in the immune system, making the body more susceptible to infectious diseases. And not just more receptive, but very, very, very receptive. We can say that vaccinations destroy the immune system. Vaccinated children get sick much more unvaccinated. This was proved by British, Dutch, American and German scientists.
The fourth argument – infectious diseases suffered in childhood, the body needs to train the immune system; vaccinations to avoid diseases, make the immune system undeveloped, which “aukaetsya” in adulthood.
The fifth argument – from vaccinations there are more complications than from diseases suffered naturally, up to the development of diseases such as autism .
Argument six-mother can to hand fetus through placenta immunity, acquired naturally, and here is “vaccinated” immunity thus not ceded, therefore, children unvaccinated mothers protected from infectious diseases better, than children vaccinated.
Argument seven, aka the slogan that can be embroidered in gold letters on a conventional anti-vaccination banner-vaccinations are beneficial to those who produce them, but not to those who receive them.
The last argument is terrifying. No, just imagine the scale of this global conspiracy, which involves almost all doctors and pharmacists, and at the same time microbiologists. The plot concerns each of us… and the turnovers! Represent, what there traction.
There are things you either believe or don’t believe. Faith comes from the depths of the unconscious-intuitive (figuratively speaking-from the heart), and no logical arguments can shake it. So it’s time to decide. If you believe in the world “vaccination” conspiracy, then this Chapter can not read further, because there is no need – you still do not believe anything. Just waste your time. And the author, to be honest, there is no such purpose as to convince or attempt the most expensive. The author only considers the problem-the myth, and shares with his readers undistorted scientific information. But if you do not like the debunking of a myth or if you do not agree with the author on something, then you can safely continue to believe in this myth. This is your right (and your personal problem too).
If the seventh argument causes you to distrust or at least a desire to understand the essence of the case, then read on. And remember that from debunking the myth about the dangers of vaccinations, we will move to debunking the myth about their benefits. So it will not be boring. You already have an idea about immunity, so you can get right to the point.
Vaccinations are artificial stimulation of the immune system?
Let me – and what’s “artificial”? And how did the word fit in here? Artificial can be a limb-prosthesis, artificial can be skin-dermatin, artificial can be a flower. The artificial is not the natural. And how can there be a “non-natural” effect on the immune system of a living organism? The word “artificial” is clearly out of place here. Just as out of place the word “chemistry”, which in our time is accepted to call (otherwise you can not say) all unnatural. Isn’t natural chemistry? All living and inanimate things are made up of chemical elements, of chemical substances.
A weakened culture of microorganisms is a biological material. As well as killed microorganisms or some of their proteins. They are introduced into the body, which is adequate to the penetration of the infectious pathogen and cause an immune response – the production of proteins-antibodies that block the action of the pathogen (prevent its reproduction or neutralize the toxic substances released by it). By the way, vaccination can be passive, when the body is not injected factors that cause the production of antibodies, and ready antibodies. For example, vaccination against hepatitis B.
“What about synthetic vaccines? some readers will ask. – They’re the most artificial.” And act, incidentally speaking, weaker natural!»
Yes-weaker. Because the synthetic vaccine is very pure. It contains only molecules of certain proteins that trigger an immune response. And often not even of the molecule as a whole, and only active in the immune sense fragments of these molecules. The immune response is a complex process. Many “impurities” – the remains of dead microorganisms, enhance the effect of the main factor. In this sense, a natural vaccine is better than a synthetic one. But it should be borne in mind that impurities can cause allergic reactions. Even the most thorough purification of biological vaccines does not give the complete absence of impurities inherent in synthetic vaccines.
The word “synthetic” defines the method of obtaining the vaccine. The active substance that in biological, that in synthetic preparation is the same, with an identical chemical formula. For example, water that is natural, that obtained in a chemical laboratory, remains water-a chemical substance with the formula H2O. Just do not now remember the taste of spring water. Taste is formed by impurities-salts contained in water, and in the example we are talking about the water itself and nothing else. A glass of synthetic water quenches thirst in the same way as a glass of natural water. But the pleasure of natural water delivers more, with this no one is going to argue.
The same molecules, regardless of the method of their production, have the same effect on the body-they participate in the same reactions. A living microorganism, a killed microorganism and a single protein of a microorganism can cause an immune response of different severity, but the essence of this response in all cases will be the same – the production of a specific antibody for a given antigen, for a foreign protein. It happened as a result of disease or vaccination-the essence is one. The antibodies will still be the same.
In principle, we can not think about synthetic vaccines, because they are used in veterinary practice. But it is necessary to have an idea about them, without it the General idea about vaccines will be incomplete.
Along the way, let’s debunk the myth that the mother can transmit to the fetus through the placenta immunity acquired naturally, and “vaccinated” immunity is not transmitted in this way. The placental barrier (Yes, the placenta is not only a link, but also a barrier between the mother and the fetus) is permeable to some substances and impervious to others. Both the transferred disease, and vaccination lead to the same immune result-development of certain and identical antibodies in both cases. And passive vaccination, by the way, adds to us exactly the same antibodies that are formed as a result of the disease. So what matters for permeability is not the method of obtaining antibodies, but their physical and chemical properties. Some molecules can pass through the placental barrier, while others can’t.
Vaccinations cause temporary immunity, which regularly need to “reinforce” through new vaccinations, and the transfer of the disease provides lifelong immunity?
That’s not quite true. Immunity to various diseases persists for different times. To some-throughout life, and to some-for several weeks. First of all, it is a foreign agent and the nature of the reaction to it, and not in the way of penetration of this agent into the body. But the “temporary” immunity resulting from the disease lasts longer than that resulting from vaccination, it is. Note that we are talking about different periods of immunity to a particular disease, not temporary immunity to any disease in the case of vaccination and lifelong in the case of disease transfer.
Try to explain to yourself why the disease is a more long-lasting immunity…
Of course, the reason is that the disease has a stronger impact on the body than vaccination. Therefore, the immune response is more pronounced and lasts longer. But, assessing this advantage, do not forget that it is given at a higher price, as well as the fact that some diseases for which vaccinations are carried out can lead to death. For examples, you do not need to go far – think at least about diphtheria or tetanus. So it’s better to get vaccinated more often than to get sick less often, isn’t it? Well, if the disease can lead to death, then there is nothing to talk about. From the standpoint of common sense, of course, and not from the standpoint of indiscriminate denial.
Vaccinations cause a malfunction in the immune system? Do they make the body more susceptible to infectious diseases? Vaccinated children get sick much more unvaccinated? Have British, Dutch, American and German scientists proved this?
To begin with, I would like to see the results of the work of these same scientists. Not “near-medical” articles on portals and in the press, but the results of several, independent of each other, randomized controlled trials conducted on the basis of reputable scientific institutions. Try to find something similar on the Web, really scientific. The author can immediately say that nothing on this topic you will not find, because such” anti-vaccination ” studies do not exist. There are only reverse studies confirming the benefits of vaccinations. But it’s better to try to look for yourself than to take someone’s word for it, right? Personal experience is the most convincing adviser.
What is a “failure” in the immune system? This is a violation of normal operation, a violation of functions. The human immunodeficiency virus causes a violation of the functions of the immune system, up to complete helplessness, because it affects immune cells. What causes vaccination? The production of specific antibodies, nothing more. Moreover, this production occurs in a more gentle mode than in the disease, this circumstance also needs to be paid attention to.
Think about it – how the production of antibodies can disrupt the entire immune system? And why the presence of another type of antibodies should “weaken” the body, reduce its immune defense? It’s illogical. The more antibodies present in the body, the stronger it is protected. To say otherwise is foolish. It’s like saying that the more money you have, the fewer items and services you can buy with it.
When you begin to look for scientific studies confirming the harm of vaccinations, look at the same time and scientific explanation of the mechanism of oppression of the immune system of the body due to vaccination.
The key word is ” scientific.”
Here is an explanatory example containing two explanations of the same process. The first-scientific, though simplified, but containing specific information, and the second – not scientific.
First: “The basis of the lymphocyte receptor that recognizes antigens and hostile microorganisms is the immunoglobulin molecule. When lymphocytes Mature, the precursors of lymphocytes, whose receptors perceive the body’s own proteins, are destroyed. This prevents the development of autoimmune diseases.”
Second: “Autoimmune disease occurs when the body begins to devour its own cells.”
We have already talked about the” training ” of the immune system in one of the previous chapters, and there is no need to repeat it. That’s bullshit. “Wake up” can just the consequences of infectious diseases. For example, one of the consequences of whooping cough may be brain damage, leading to epilepsy.
“And vaccinations lead to autism!”– I will say right now the opponents of vaccination.
Here it is unknown who invented it, but we know that it’s fiction. There is no serious research proving the development of autism due to any vaccination.
Do you want to know where this myth was born? Please-the child during the first two years of life had a number of vaccinations, and at the age of two the child was diagnosed with autism. Therefore, vaccinations lead to autism.
How do you like this logic?
Why did vaccinations cause autism? Why not breastfeeding or lack thereof? Or, say, the swaddling? Logic here there is no-alone speculation. It’s like linking the death of a person who died, for example, from acute cardiovascular failure with systematic tram riding.
Allergic reactions from vaccines happen, it is so.
But here we need to clarify-the reaction is caused by some individual vaccine, and not all vaccinations at all. There are no people in whom any vaccination is accompanied by an allergic reaction. This time.
The reaction most often causes is not itself active agent of the vaccine, and some admixture. The production of vaccines is constantly being improved, including in order to ensure that the product causes as few allergic reactions as possible. That’s two.
If a person had an allergic reaction to a vaccine containing weakened or killed microbes or individual microbial proteins, then the introduction of “full” fully viable microbes reaction would be even stronger, because the body would get a lot more allergen, the factor causing the Allergy. However, during the disease, this reaction often goes unnoticed, because it is “overshadowed” by the symptoms of an infectious disease.
The opponents of vaccination have another mythical argument, which we have not considered because of its absolute and obvious absurdity-vaccines are supposedly useless, have no effect. What to say about it-to argue? It is enough to remember that only thanks to vaccination it was possible to eliminate such dangerous diseases as plague and smallpox.
With the first myth about the dangers of vaccination, we figured out.
It would seem that with all this said, it is not a myth to claim that vaccination is uniquely useful. So that’s what it is…
That’s right, but not quite. Pay attention to the word “unambiguously”. Vaccination is mostly a mass process, it is carried out by large groups of people, and often this mass pushes into the background the individual characteristics of the person who is vaccinated.
In addition to indications, any medical method has contraindications. If vaccination is carried out in the presence of contraindications, then you can get some complication. Contraindication to contraindication strife. There are “significant” contraindications, which can not be ignored, and there are “minor” – for example, just suffered a viral infection. A person can get sick with it “on his feet”, without going to a doctor and may not remember the fact of the disease during vaccination. As a result, the body will react to the introduction of the vaccine much stronger than expected.
Vaccination does not mean the formation of the expected immune response. All people are different and their organs work differently. Therefore, after vaccination, it is desirable to determine the presence and concentration of relevant antibodies in the blood. If there are few or no antibodies at all, vaccination should be repeated. Within what time after vaccination it is necessary to produce a blood test for antibodies, the doctor says. He will explain the result and tell you what to do. It is important to remember this – if the vaccination is a planned mass event, regulated by the relevant documents, then the control of the formation of antibodies is a private, personal matter. No one will remind you of this except yourself. In General, vaccine dosages are calculated in such a way as to induce the desired immune response in the vast majority of vaccinated, but suddenly you belong to a small minority? Control, as you know, does not spoil things.
Vaccines are different, some better quality, and others worse. It is desirable (if possible) to choose the best. But it is important to understand that the search for a better vaccine should not disrupt the timing of revaccination-re-vaccination. For each vaccination there is a schedule of vaccination, which should be clearly observed, otherwise the good of vaccination will not be.
So, in order to benefit from vaccinations was not mythical, you need:
To take into account all contraindications.
Strictly adhere to schedules of vaccinations.
Control the formation of antibodies after vaccination.
To the question: “to do or not to vaccinate?”, there is only one answer-do! But doing the right thing.