Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Alternative Medicine/Health -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: scaram(o)uche who wrote (59)	11/2/1999 8:48:00 PM
From: LLCF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 357

<Why immunize? Because certain diseases present danger> Actually I meant to limit my question to the measels example, not vaccines in general... but your post answered my concern anyway about losing natural resistance over generations... I'm reading again: <The children of women vaccinated against measles are more susceptible to the disease because their mothers do not pass on as many natural antibodies as do women who have had the illness> Now that I think about it, it is a concern of some doctors that lack of 'the real thing' actually makes us 'not as immune' than the real thing isn't it? As long as we can't get weaker and weaker through generations because of lack of real disease I would think that's a non issue. DAK