Will you immunize your children?

I don't believe in circumcision...because it was mandated to the Jewish people...and I'm not Jewish. Preventative medical reasons...don't apply in this day and age. I think people who circumcise do it because everyone else does it...but they don't really have a conviction that is based on anything deaper.

 

One could make the arguement that immunization done right should be fine as well.

 

Hospitals and doctors do not as a rule circumsise on the eighth day...they do it while the baby is still in the hospital...on the first or second day. Then again the "Bris" isn't performed by a doctor is it? Don't forget the reasons behind many of the "laws" that were handed down to the Jewish people...cleanliness and health...because of where they lived and the times in which they lived.

I think to circumsise for any other reason than adhering to mosaic law, is a form of mutilation...as in the country of Uganda...where female circumsision is practiced.

 

I'm inclined to agree with Wisdom Seeker.

We don't remove a child's appendix unless there's a reason. We don't remove childrens' tonsils unless there's a reason. We should also not remove a person's foreskin unless there's a reason.

To do any less violates a doctor's oath of doing no harm.

 

If you know me so well...list them...or edit this personal comment out of your post.

[ December 30, 2002, 02:11 PM: Message edited by: WisdomSeeker ]

 

The amount of mercury that had been present in immunizations is well below FDA levels. Also, the CDC reports that thimerosal (the preservative that contains mercury) has been removed from all routinely recommeded vaccines for children (DTaP, IPV, MMR).

 

Well, our legal system includes alot of the Old Testament law. Do you ignore those?

There was never a time in your life that you would have considered marrying your brother (if you had one) or father or any other blood relative. You don't ignore that?

 

It seems that you could have very easily left such personal comments out of it. Your answers seem to be weak. Therefore I would appreciate it if you would edit out your personal comment about me. And I'll leave this discussion.

[ December 30, 2002, 03:40 PM: Message edited by: WisdomSeeker ]

 

I gave two examples Wisdomseeker. What more do you want?

 

Circumcision is more a tradition today than anything. Most fathers want their sons to look like them.

 

Isn't mercury highly toxic to the human body? I thought that it was so toxic that you shouldn't even handle it. And that mercury never leaves the body. Why would you knowingly put mercury into your child's body?

They say they have removed it, but who's going to prove that? I'm sure they threw away all the supplies on hand when this fact was made known. They knew that it was toxic, and that it would harm children, yet they put it into the doses because it was cheaper to have larger bottles instead of individual dosages. But the larger bottles would go bad for the doctors, because they didn't do mass injections all at once. When the drug industry was called to the carpet, they decided to remove it, but not at any loss to them. So, if they removed it, did they start to package it in the individual dosages again?

[ December 30, 2002, 10:25 PM: Message edited by: TheOliveBranch ]

 

As time has gone by in the US, the occurrence of infant circumcision has fallen. Today, about 55% of infant males are kept intact at birth. Trends show it will be less than 25% in about 15 years, which is about what it is in Europe.

Part of it is also doctors taking a more minimalist approach these days. It used to be they ripped tonsils out as a preventative measure. We've since learned that there's no need for it. Also, doctors used to remove appendixes any time there was an abdominal surgery, one of those "while we're here" things. But that's no longer done either. Turns out we're learning that vestigal body structures, such as the tonsils, foreskin, appendix, ear lobes, etc, have some ancillary benefits that don't warrant removing them unless there's a problem.

 

Isn't mercury highly toxic to the human body? I thought that it was so toxic that you shouldn't even handle it. And that mercury never leaves the body. Why would you knowingly put mercury into your child's body?

They say they have removed it, but who's going to prove that? I'm sure they threw away all the supplies on hand when this fact was made known. They knew that it was toxic, and that it would harm children, yet they put it into the doses because it was cheaper to have larger bottles instead of individual dosages.

I did a little poking, since I was curious myself. Yes, mercury is highly toxic. The amount of mercury that was in vaccine preservatives was in trace amounts, but still measureable. Vaccines have an expiration date, so you can be assured that the routine childhood vaccines that contained thimerosal are long gone. Mercury is an element that's naturally occurring, just not generally in large enough amounts to be hazardous. (Here's an interesting tidbit: As your body grows in size, it's able to handle greater amounts of mercury.). If you're unsure, you can ask the health care professional administering the vaccine to verify that it's thimerosal free.

[ December 30, 2002, 11:39 PM: Message edited by: Johnv ]