Health - Resources and discussion for everything health-related

2884 readers

228 users here now

Health: physical and mental, individual and public.

Discussions, issues, resources, news, everything.

See the pinned post for a long list of other communities dedicated to health or specific diagnoses. The list is continuously updated.

Nothing here shall be taken as medical or any other kind of professional advice.

Commercial advertising is considered spam and not allowed. If you're not sure, contact mods to ask beforehand.

Linked videos without original description context by OP to initiate healthy, constructive discussions will be removed.

Regular rules of lemmy.world apply. Be civil.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

WhoRoger@lemmy.world

RoyalEngineering@lemmy.world

Awa@lemmy.world

595

Texas children poisoned after RFK Jr touts vitamin A as measles treatment (www.telegraph.co.uk)

submitted 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/health@lemmy.world

107 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Summary

Texas hospitals are treating children with vitamin A poisoning linked to Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s promotion of the supplement as a measles treatment.

At Covenant Children’s hospital in Lubbock, patients with measles showed abnormal liver function due to excessive vitamin A intake.

Kennedy, the U.S. health secretary, claimed vitamin A dramatically reduces measles mortality. Experts warn his messaging confuses parents and downplays the proven protection of the MMR vaccine.

The U.S. faces its worst measles outbreak in decades, with nearly 500 cases across 21 states and two confirmed deaths.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] sfu@lemm.ee 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I say "if", because a person can be pro vaccine, but have an issue with one in particular after researching it.

[–] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

Sure. That if is still holding up your entire argument. Counter point, there are plenty of vaccines we don't administer because the risk of the vaccine doesn't outweigh the benefits. Off the top of my head, I can think of polio and smallpox vaccinces. There are large organizations doing actual research and crunching the numbers to find out, so we already do consider the efficacy before we just inject kids full of vaccines for no reason.

I imagine, if you went to court about not wanting your child to receive a certain medical treatment, and you showed up with 50 or so peer reviewed and supported journal articles showing the benefits of the treatments along with the risk and their rate of occurrence, then referenced current and predicted rates for the conditions they are medicating against and the severity of those conditions and summarizes with your own peer reviewed research that the particular treatment is no longer efficacious... Then you can make the claim that you did your own research.

If you show up with a fucking Facebook post and a Bible, then the state ought to take your kids away for their own safety.

[–] sfu@lemm.ee 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I don't want to be injected with something unless I agree to it. That is not unreasonable. To forcibly inject people with drugs / vaccines against their will is assault.

[–] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago

Sure, but there is a difference between you making an uninformed and dangerous decision for yourself vs making an uninformed and dangerous decision for your child who is unable to decide for themselves. Especially considering we're taking about diseases and conditions that have a relatively high chance of chronic or terminal outcomes.