I've never heard of the blood brain barrier thing, is that a common health myth that's going around?
Thanks!
I've never heard of the blood brain barrier thing, is that a common health myth that's going around?
Its not a myth, its on Wikipedia!!!![]()
and according to the wise wikipedia man (or woman), it does sound like a theory that has been debunked
Just to clarify; TC's Wikipedia quote says the early research was wrong and that babies are born with a fully functional blood brain barrier...
Wikipedia is pretty cool charlotte, my uni course is full of pretty technical medical stuff, I use Wiki a lot (at lot a lot!) and I get really good marks when I put my mind to it. I've never come across a dodgy entry and I prefer to use it over the thousands of dollars of medical textbooks in the house. Though I wouldn't admit any of this to my lecturers...
I used to be very cautious about using it but I've owned textbooks that are not as concise or accurate.
Audax has summed up my views really well.
And DS comes with us to loads of things, and meets loads of people - play dates, play group, church, family, friends, singstar parties, restaurants ... so he is exposed to lots of different people, who may or may not have been immunised themselves, and so who may or may not be carrying something ...
So we go with our gut - which in our situation is to immunise.
But absolutely do your own research, review your own situation, and make the decision you think is right for your daughter![]()
Last edited by peanutter; June 3rd, 2011 at 11:03 PM. : typo... :)
Best advice I was ever given was to assess our risks as a family against each disease. We are at low risk of each of them and our youngest daughter hasn't had a single vaccination to date ( she's 21 months old) we'll start her hep b before she starts school and is out of my care, prett sure she won't be sharing needles or having sex while she's hone with me all day every dayand also her mmr will be done before school. She'll be getting her tetanus done soon as she's just started walking. Other that those vaccinations, she won't be getting any others
Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk
There is a very good reason for that. Wiki is not, in the slightest, considered a peer-reviewed document. In recent years, it has apparently cleaned up its reputation. However, one should use it with absolute skepticism because of the origins of almost every article - where anyone could write whatever they wanted, and often contrary to anything resembling the truth.
err - I have. That's why I stand by what I wrote. And that's why you wouldn't ever EVER reference it in your course work. You would be laughed at. Hard.
Sorry - that was a bit, wasn't it. It just yanks my chain that people take it as gospel. I went to uni with a bunch of clowns that still wouldn't know a peer review journal/article if it was stapled to their degrees. Of course, unless you're an academic... it's all a bit academic.![]()
DH just finished a DipEd (methods are senior physics and maths) and tells me he referenced Wikipedia in his assignments. No laughter ensued.
Entreat, I suspect it depends on what you are researching/writing about.
I know what you mean, you have to know that I am very savvy about my research and am very very fastidious about any information that's at all controversial. I have even recently started using journal impact factors to help me make decisions about papers...
I have also referenced Wikipedia in assignments and it was appropriate (I wasn't even laughed at).
Moderator Message ยป
Closing this thread as it has clearly gone off-topic...
Bookmarks