Re: Neighbor hesitant to come near us with Chicken Pox

[Guest guest]

Oops, I meant to say Oy Vey! I got my Jewish and Spanish mixed together. ;~)

Anita

SaraShaughnessy@... wrote:

Repeated exposure to chicken pox does not mean that you will get shingles.

When someone gets chickenpox the virus stays dormant in their body, if their

immune system becomes compromised then the virus reactivates itself as shingles.

I have read that repeated exposure to chicken pox actually helps PREVENT

shingles in late adulthood.

--

Sara

Proud Mama to

Colin 12/07/99

Jack 8/07/02

-------------- Original message --------------

From: Anita Durney <mydurney@...>

I just realized something. God forbid I should purposely expose my boys to the

chicken pox not knowing one of them could have already had a subclinical case of

it and consequently end up being responsible for him getting a case of the

shingles. I'm just not cool with that.

My gut always told me this wasn't the right way to insure good health in my

children and now I'm starting to understand why. In my opinion, certain things

like disease shouldn't be manipulated by mankind; for any reason. Phew...there

-- I've said it.

Anita :~)

Sheri Nakken <snakken@...> wrote:

At 09:49 AM 2/7/2006 -0800, you wrote:

>I never had the chicken pox. Does that mean I will never get the shingles?

I'm not clear on how that works Sheri.

>

> Anita

Supposedly, but you may have had it and didn't realize it - a subclinical case

Sheri>

--------------------------------------------------------

Sheri Nakken, R.N., MA, Hahnemannian Homeopath

Vaccination Information & Choice Network, Nevada City CA & Wales UK

$$ Donations to help in the work - accepted by Paypal account

vaccineinfo@... voicemail US 530-740-0561

(go to http://www.paypal.com) or by mail

Vaccines - http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/vaccine.htm

Vaccine Dangers On-Line course - http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/vaccineclass.htm

Homeopathy On-Line course - http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/homeo.htm

ANY INFO OBTAINED HERE NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS MEDICAL

OR LEGAL ADVICE. THE DECISION TO VACCINATE IS YOURS AND YOURS ALONE.

******

" Just look at us. Everything is backwards; everything is upside down.

Doctors destroy health, lawyers destroy justice, universities destroy

knowledge, governments destroy freedom, the major media destroy information

and religions destroy spirituality " .... Ellner

[Guest guest]

Hey Sara,

Since we are clearly seeing an increase in shingles among children, wouldn't

it be a valid concern that repeated exposure would be like playing russian

roulette these days? I think all that was written and all that we think we knew

about the chicken pox needs to be seriously reviewed now that we have the

vaccine to factor in.The chicken pox vaccine has made this previously rare

disease among children more common which will inevitably change everything.

Anita

SaraShaughnessy@... wrote:

Repeated exposure to chicken pox does not mean that you will get shingles.

When someone gets chickenpox the virus stays dormant in their body, if their

immune system becomes compromised then the virus reactivates itself as shingles.

I have read that repeated exposure to chicken pox actually helps PREVENT

shingles in late adulthood.

--

Sara

Proud Mama to

Colin 12/07/99

Jack 8/07/02

-------------- Original message --------------

From: Anita Durney <mydurney@...>

I just realized something. God forbid I should purposely expose my boys to the

chicken pox not knowing one of them could have already had a subclinical case of

it and consequently end up being responsible for him getting a case of the

shingles. I'm just not cool with that.

My gut always told me this wasn't the right way to insure good health in my

children and now I'm starting to understand why. In my opinion, certain things

like disease shouldn't be manipulated by mankind; for any reason. Phew...there

-- I've said it.

Anita :~)

Sheri Nakken <snakken@...> wrote:

At 09:49 AM 2/7/2006 -0800, you wrote:

>I never had the chicken pox. Does that mean I will never get the shingles?

I'm not clear on how that works Sheri.

>

> Anita

Supposedly, but you may have had it and didn't realize it - a subclinical case

Sheri>

--------------------------------------------------------

Sheri Nakken, R.N., MA, Hahnemannian Homeopath

Vaccination Information & Choice Network, Nevada City CA & Wales UK

$$ Donations to help in the work - accepted by Paypal account

vaccineinfo@... voicemail US 530-740-0561

(go to http://www.paypal.com) or by mail

Vaccines - http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/vaccine.htm

Vaccine Dangers On-Line course - http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/vaccineclass.htm

Homeopathy On-Line course - http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/homeo.htm

ANY INFO OBTAINED HERE NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS MEDICAL

OR LEGAL ADVICE. THE DECISION TO VACCINATE IS YOURS AND YOURS ALONE.

******

" Just look at us. Everything is backwards; everything is upside down.

Doctors destroy health, lawyers destroy justice, universities destroy

knowledge, governments destroy freedom, the major media destroy information

and religions destroy spirituality " .... Ellner

[Guest guest]

factor in.The chicken pox vaccine has made this previously rare

disease among children more common which will inevitably change

everything.

___________________

Anita,

Chicken pox in children has never been a rare disease prior to the

vaccine. I think you're mixing your thoughts.

Jackie Noel

www.sagaciousairedales.com

www.sagaciousdogcountry.com

[Guest guest]

No, you would still have the chance of shingles if your immune system is

compromised BUT (and this is a pretty big BUT) if you get chicken pox as a

child, it is a realtively benign disease and that is *usually* enough for you to

not get it again, which can protect your children from getting them as adults,

which can be dangerous. Like I said before, I had them at 17 and was miserably

sick! I couldn't move for like two days and was covered in pox. I had a really

high fever and wanted to die. My three year old, who just got over them, had

about 1/3 of the pox that I had, he only ran a low fever and ran around playing

the whole time, oh, he was a bit cranky one day and took a longer nap.

I didn't purposely expose my three year old. I did expose my six year old when

he was 2. I wanted to make sure that he got them and that I knew the source.

There is more control when you expose them yourself. I have no clue as to where

Jack got them, I don't know if they were wild or not. With Colin (the one I

exposed) I knew they were wild and I knew that he was healthy at the time, so

that he could handle them without too much trouble. I wish that I had had that

choice with Jack, luckily, he was healthy when he got them.

--

Sara

Proud Mama to

Colin 12/07/99

Jack 8/07/02

If so, a full blown case of it really isn't *cleaning house* at all.

[Guest guest]

>I did expose my six year old when he was 2. I wanted to make sure that he got

them and that I knew the source. There is more control when you expose them

yourself. I have no clue as to where Jack got them, I don't know if they were

wild or not. With Colin (the one I exposed) I knew they were wild and I knew

that he was healthy at the time, so that he could handle them without too much

trouble.

Sara,

I don't know what year the cp vax became mandatory though I do know it was

avalable and optionally for a time before. Was the vax in play when you

knowingly exposed your six year old to cp at the age of two? Also, did Colin

experience a more *full blown* case than Jack? Sorry for the questions, but I am

going somewhere with it.

Anita

Anita

---------------------------------

Relax. virus scanning helps detect nasty viruses!

[Guest guest]

Colin was exposed to chicken pox by a little girl who caught it from her

mother's shingles. The mother had not been vaccinated, she had chicken pox as a

child, she developed shingles, her daughter rubbed the rash while nursing and

developed chicken pox. Considering all of that, I am certain that Colin caught

a wild strain. Colin did have a worse case than Jack and it was worse than the

other kids who came down with it from that one source. The difference? Colin

had been vaccinated as an infant, up until he was " supposed " to get the MMR.

His immune system wasn't as strong as the other children's (none of whom had

been vaccinated for anything), and it still isn't that strong, as he has

allergies and asthma. Jack has never been vaccinated and is much healthier than

Colin and most other kids that I have seen. Jack hardly ever gets sick and when

he does, he is usually over it quicker than Colin and it never hits him as hard.

A fever of 99 will have Colin miserable in bed, while Jack was running around

playing with one of 102 just a few months ago. Fevers also don't last as long

in Jack, I think that it is because his immune system is stronger and more

efficient.

--

Sara

Proud Mama to

Colin 12/07/99

Jack 8/07/02

-------------- Original message --------------

From: Anita Durney <mydurney@...>

>I did expose my six year old when he was 2. I wanted to make sure that he got

them and that I knew the source. There is more control when you expose them

yourself. I have no clue as to where Jack got them, I don't know if they were

wild or not. With Colin (the one I exposed) I knew they were wild and I knew

that he was healthy at the time, so that he could handle them without too much

trouble.

Sara,

I don't know what year the cp vax became mandatory though I do know it was

avalable and optionally for a time before. Was the vax in play when you

knowingly exposed your six year old to cp at the age of two? Also, did Colin

experience a more *full blown* case than Jack? Sorry for the questions, but I am

going somewhere with it.

Anita

Anita

---------------------------------

Relax. virus scanning helps detect nasty viruses!

[Guest guest]

My understanding is that we WOULD want a *not so nice* full blown case of any of

the childhood diseases. Remarkable health follows for many as a result. Sheri N.

has posted material from The ls of Tropical Paediatrics [53] supporting this

theory with well documented cases.

According to what I have read and what I think I have some understanding of,

it's when the immune system is unable to launch a full response, that we run

into troubles like auto immune problems such as asthma and allergies that are so

common these days. When our children get a mild a case of cp, does that mean

it's because they have strong immune systems and seem to deal with it better or

is it because their immune systems weren't strong enough to respond fully? This

question keeps me up at night.

I don't mean to probe so deeply, but are you absolutely certain that the woman

with shingles had a natural case of it? She had to be re-exposed to the chicken

pox by some one. Maybe her daughter contracted chicken pox first. Maybe the

mother got the shingles from being exposed to her daughter's chicken pox. Maybe

not, but the million dollar question for me is WHERE does the initial chicken

pox exposure come from these days and how does that translate healthwise to

those who come in contact with the vaccine induced mutation of the natural

disease?

It just seems that it would be extremely difficult, if not iompossible, to

know for sure whether any of us has been exposed to the *wild* or *vaccine

induced* chicken pox or any other disease for that matter since the use of their

respective vaccines came into play.

Anita

SaraShaughnessy@... wrote:

Colin was exposed to chicken pox by a little girl who caught it from her

mother's shingles. The mother had not been vaccinated, she had chicken pox as a

child, she developed shingles, her daughter rubbed the rash while nursing and

developed chicken pox. Considering all of that, I am certain that Colin caught

a wild strain. Colin did have a worse case than Jack and it was worse than the

other kids who came down with it from that one source. The difference? Colin

had been vaccinated as an infant, up until he was " supposed " to get the MMR.

His immune system wasn't as strong as the other children's (none of whom had

been vaccinated for anything), and it still isn't that strong, as he has

allergies and asthma. Jack has never been vaccinated and is much healthier than

Colin and most other kids that I have seen. Jack hardly ever gets sick and when

he does, he is usually over it quicker than Colin and it never hits him as hard.

A fever of 99 will have Colin miserable in bed, while

Jack was running around playing with one of 102 just a few months ago. Fevers

also don't last as long in Jack, I think that it is because his immune system is

stronger and more efficient.

--

Sara

---------------------------------

- Helps protect you from nasty viruses.

[Guest guest]

Colin's was " not so nice " , yet not as bad as my case at 17. He was covered and

even ended up in the ER.

My understanding of shingles is that it isn't brought on by re exposure, but

that the virus is just able to reactivate itself if the person has a compromised

immune system.

--

Sara

Proud Mama to

Colin 12/07/99

Jack 8/07/02

-------------- Original message --------------

From: Anita Durney <mydurney@...>

My understanding is that we WOULD want a *not so nice* full blown case of any of

the childhood diseases. Remarkable health follows for many as a result. Sheri N.

has posted material from The ls of Tropical Paediatrics [53] supporting this

theory with well documented cases.

According to what I have read and what I think I have some understanding of,

it's when the immune system is unable to launch a full response, that we run

into troubles like auto immune problems such as asthma and allergies that are so

common these days. When our children get a mild a case of cp, does that mean

it's because they have strong immune systems and seem to deal with it better or

is it because their immune systems weren't strong enough to respond fully? This

question keeps me up at night.

I don't mean to probe so deeply, but are you absolutely certain that the woman

with shingles had a natural case of it? She had to be re-exposed to the chicken

pox by some one. Maybe her daughter contracted chicken pox first. Maybe the

mother got the shingles from being exposed to her daughter's chicken pox. Maybe

not, but the million dollar question for me is WHERE does the initial chicken

pox exposure come from these days and how does that translate healthwise to

those who come in contact with the vaccine induced mutation of the natural

disease?

It just seems that it would be extremely difficult, if not iompossible, to

know for sure whether any of us has been exposed to the *wild* or *vaccine

induced* chicken pox or any other disease for that matter since the use of their

respective vaccines came into play.

Anita

SaraShaughnessy@... wrote:

Colin was exposed to chicken pox by a little girl who caught it from her

mother's shingles. The mother had not been vaccinated, she had chicken pox as a

child, she developed shingles, her daughter rubbed the rash while nursing and

developed chicken pox. Considering all of that, I am certain that Colin caught

a wild strain. Colin did have a worse case than Jack and it was worse than the

other kids who came down with it from that one source. The difference? Colin

had been vaccinated as an infant, up until he was " supposed " to get the MMR.

His immune system wasn't as strong as the other children's (none of whom had

been vaccinated for anything), and it still isn't that strong, as he has

allergies and asthma. Jack has never been vaccinated and is much healthier than

Colin and most other kids that I have seen. Jack hardly ever gets sick and when

he does, he is usually over it quicker than Colin and it never hits him as hard.

A fever of 99 will have Colin miserable in bed, while

Jack was running around playing with one of 102 just a few months ago. Fevers

also don't last as long in Jack, I think that it is because his immune system is

stronger and more efficient.

--

Sara

---------------------------------

- Helps protect you from nasty viruses.

[Guest guest]

I see, but it is opportunities for re-exposure to the chicken pox that help

prevent shingles in the first place. Did I get it right?

Anita

SaraShaughnessy@... wrote:

Colin's was " not so nice " , yet not as bad as my case at 17. He was covered

and even ended up in the ER.

My understanding of shingles is that it isn't brought on by re exposure, but

that the virus is just able to reactivate itself if the person has a compromised

immune system.

--

Sara

Proud Mama to

Colin 12/07/99

Jack 8/07/02

-------------- Original message --------------

From: Anita Durney <mydurney@...>

My understanding is that we WOULD want a *not so nice* full blown case of any of

the childhood diseases. Remarkable health follows for many as a result. Sheri N.

has posted material from The ls of Tropical Paediatrics [53] supporting this

theory with well documented cases.

According to what I have read and what I think I have some understanding of,

it's when the immune system is unable to launch a full response, that we run

into troubles like auto immune problems such as asthma and allergies that are so

common these days. When our children get a mild a case of cp, does that mean

it's because they have strong immune systems and seem to deal with it better or

is it because their immune systems weren't strong enough to respond fully? This

question keeps me up at night.

I don't mean to probe so deeply, but are you absolutely certain that the woman

with shingles had a natural case of it? She had to be re-exposed to the chicken

pox by some one. Maybe her daughter contracted chicken pox first. Maybe the

mother got the shingles from being exposed to her daughter's chicken pox. Maybe

not, but the million dollar question for me is WHERE does the initial chicken

pox exposure come from these days and how does that translate healthwise to

those who come in contact with the vaccine induced mutation of the natural

disease?

It just seems that it would be extremely difficult, if not iompossible, to

know for sure whether any of us has been exposed to the *wild* or *vaccine

induced* chicken pox or any other disease for that matter since the use of their

respective vaccines came into play.

Anita

SaraShaughnessy@... wrote:

Colin was exposed to chicken pox by a little girl who caught it from her

mother's shingles. The mother had not been vaccinated, she had chicken pox as a

child, she developed shingles, her daughter rubbed the rash while nursing and

developed chicken pox. Considering all of that, I am certain that Colin caught

a wild strain. Colin did have a worse case than Jack and it was worse than the

other kids who came down with it from that one source. The difference? Colin

had been vaccinated as an infant, up until he was " supposed " to get the MMR.

His immune system wasn't as strong as the other children's (none of whom had

been vaccinated for anything), and it still isn't that strong, as he has

allergies and asthma. Jack has never been vaccinated and is much healthier than

Colin and most other kids that I have seen. Jack hardly ever gets sick and when

he does, he is usually over it quicker than Colin and it never hits him as hard.

A fever of 99 will have Colin miserable in bed, while

Jack was running around playing with one of 102 just a few months ago. Fevers

also don't last as long in Jack, I think that it is because his immune system is

stronger and more efficient.

--

Sara

---------------------------------

- Helps protect you from nasty viruses.

[Guest guest]

From what I have read, yes.

--

Sara

Proud Mama to

Colin 12/07/99

Jack 8/07/02

-------------- Original message --------------

From: Anita Durney <mydurney@...>

I see, but it is opportunities for re-exposure to the chicken pox that help

prevent shingles in the first place. Did I get it right?

Anita

SaraShaughnessy@... wrote:

Colin's was " not so nice " , yet not as bad as my case at 17. He was covered

and even ended up in the ER.

My understanding of shingles is that it isn't brought on by re exposure, but

that the virus is just able to reactivate itself if the person has a compromised

immune system.

--

Sara

Proud Mama to

Colin 12/07/99

Jack 8/07/02

-------------- Original message --------------

From: Anita Durney <mydurney@...>

My understanding is that we WOULD want a *not so nice* full blown case of any of

the childhood diseases. Remarkable health follows for many as a result. Sheri N.

has posted material from The ls of Tropical Paediatrics [53] supporting this

theory with well documented cases.

According to what I have read and what I think I have some understanding of,

it's when the immune system is unable to launch a full response, that we run

into troubles like auto immune problems such as asthma and allergies that are so

common these days. When our children get a mild a case of cp, does that mean

it's because they have strong immune systems and seem to deal with it better or

is it because their immune systems weren't strong enough to respond fully? This

question keeps me up at night.

I don't mean to probe so deeply, but are you absolutely certain that the woman

with shingles had a natural case of it? She had to be re-exposed to the chicken

pox by some one. Maybe her daughter contracted chicken pox first. Maybe the

mother got the shingles from being exposed to her daughter's chicken pox. Maybe

not, but the million dollar question for me is WHERE does the initial chicken

pox exposure come from these days and how does that translate healthwise to

those who come in contact with the vaccine induced mutation of the natural

disease?

It just seems that it would be extremely difficult, if not iompossible, to

know for sure whether any of us has been exposed to the *wild* or *vaccine

induced* chicken pox or any other disease for that matter since the use of their

respective vaccines came into play.

Anita

SaraShaughnessy@... wrote:

Colin was exposed to chicken pox by a little girl who caught it from her

mother's shingles. The mother had not been vaccinated, she had chicken pox as a

child, she developed shingles, her daughter rubbed the rash while nursing and

developed chicken pox. Considering all of that, I am certain that Colin caught

a wild strain. Colin did have a worse case than Jack and it was worse than the

other kids who came down with it from that one source. The difference? Colin

had been vaccinated as an infant, up until he was " supposed " to get the MMR.

His immune system wasn't as strong as the other children's (none of whom had

been vaccinated for anything), and it still isn't that strong, as he has

allergies and asthma. Jack has never been vaccinated and is much healthier than

Colin and most other kids that I have seen. Jack hardly ever gets sick and when

he does, he is usually over it quicker than Colin and it never hits him as hard.

A fever of 99 will have Colin miserable in bed, while

Jack was running around playing with one of 102 just a few months ago. Fevers

also don't last as long in Jack, I think that it is because his immune system is

stronger and more efficient.

--

Sara

---------------------------------

- Helps protect you from nasty viruses.

[Guest guest]

>

> jackie,

> i think anita was referring to shingles having been

> extremely rare in children pre varicella vax.

> :-)

> claudia

>

> --- jnoelsagacious <jnoelsagacious@...>

>

OOOOPPPPPSSS - shingles yes - almost never heard of it even in old

folks years ago.

Jackie Noel

www.sagaciousairedales.com

www.sagaciousdogcountry.com

[Guest guest]

my husband has the shingles and we have 2 children ages 2 and 8 mths. did your

little girl ever get the chicken pox from being exposed to the shingles? just

wondering! i hope my girls go ahead and get the NORMAL chicken pox from being

exposed to the shingles! kim

<claudiaayaz@...> wrote: oh yes. it can and does happen. just

like you can have

the same childhood disease twice.

claudia

--- Anita Durney <mydurney@...> wrote:

> Now I'm really confused :~I Do you mean I could

> have had the chicken pox without ever knowing due to

> the absence of pox?

>

> Anita

>

>

>

> " Sheri B. " <tallchick1966@...> wrote:

> Right. You have to have had the chicken pox

> (whether you knew you had them or not) to get

> shingles.

>

> Kay's son had a bout of them this summer but they

> took care of it with hp and I think he did quite

> well, from what she shared with me.

>

> Sheri B.

>

> Anita Durney <mydurney@...> wrote:

> I never had the chicken pox. Does that mean I will

> never get the shingles? I'm not clear on how that

> works Sheri.

>

> Anita

>

>

> " Sheri B. " <tallchick1966@...> wrote:

> As I had mentioned earlier, I think that the

> neighbor's child who has chicken pox has been around

> the past few days. I wanted to try to expose my

> toddler girl but the neighbor is hesitant. Our

> other neighbor just finished a round of very painful

> shingles and she said that she could not knowingly

> expose my children to something that could

> eventually cause them to have shingles. Plus, the

> lady she works with has horrible chicken pox scars

> on her face.

>

> I asked her if she knows of anybody else who has

> had shingles. Not that it can't happen - it does -

> but it would not change my decision about my

> children getting full immunity verses a shot full of

> chemicals and dead baby cells.

>

> Sigh. We'll see if she's already been exposed

> enough.

>

> We're all kind of sicky sick here today anyway, so

> it's probably best not to add insult to injury at

> the moment.

>

> Sheri B.

>

>

> ---------------------------------

> Brings words and photos together (easily) with

> PhotoMail - it's free and works with .

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been

> removed]

>

>

>

>