ugh gotta run the boo to the doctor at 9, he's got a wicked cough and is running a fever.

ADD is not equivalent to "loser" (ok, I lied about leaving). Many of the most successful people in this world are ADD and/or learning disabled. Why is that? Oh yes, because they, out of necessity, have to learn alternative ways of learning and doing things. This makes them flexible, adaptable, creative, and hard-working. The only time ADD is equivalent to "loser" is when people use the term out of ignorance and a need to prove their own (lack of) superiority.

I feel sorry for you, having such a negative view of both children and their parents. Not every family is like that, matter of fact, very few in my experience. Seems to me that you are the one falling for the bs about things. And just as an FYI, mommies go to work not to pay for big screens but to pay for things like mortgages, rent, food, electricity, clothing. It's unfortunate that we live in a society now where one income doesn't cut it anymore. It hasn't in a long time, and not through choice for most of us. It is what it is, though, and we are stuck with it. We do the best we can.

You want to beat your kids and blame them for the world going to hell, no one can stop you. But frankly, we brought the kids into the world and it's not their fault. So taking our frustrations out on them isn't the answer.

As I'm tired of this conversation, peace out.

Well then, I'm sure there's a pile of money out there somewhere with your name on it. Go for it!

My point was, as you so not surprisingly overlooked, is that based on your analogy, all research is skewed.

Seriously, right? And my goodness, what if we ALL walked around hitting each other because we don't like what someone did or said? That would certainly make the world a better place, right? Matter of fact, I disagree with people (or vice versa) every day, I'm just going to start popping everyone on the butt when that happens. I can beat everyone into submission and rule the world.

IMO, the teacher handled that pretty inappropriately. Not that she didn't have cause for concern and frustration but that conversation should have been held privately. If it were me, I would most certainly have a conversation with both her and the principal.

Also, you may want to consider having your daughter tested for learning disabilities. My son's started exhibiting themselves about the same age. Turned out, he is LD in math and writing and this was causing him an extreme amount of frustration, which he would act out in class. While he was not a hitter, there were other issues. Once his LD's started being addressed, his behavior improved DRAMATICALLY. Most kid's learning issues start manifesting themselves about 1st or 2nd grade. The longer you wait to address it, the worse the problem gets.

By your logic, all research is severely skewed as there is no research study used where every single person from a set of people can possibly be researched. What you do (and what is done) is extrapolate answers based on the majority of responses.

As for the rest of your answer, I'd hazard a guess that there is a far higher increase in your examples above but I'd also hazard a guess that the reasons for such are far more complex than using or not using corporal punishment.

It's called expanding our knowledge base. We know now things people didn't know then. And, since not everyone is a Christian, this doesn't pertain to more than 50% of the people in the world. And since many people believe that the bible is just a set of fairy tales used to control others, it's no wonder that violence against others is so widely advocated there. And yes, spanking your children is using violence against a fellow human being. Contrary to belief, children are people too.

I thought you went home?

You'll love it! Free drinks in the casinos, what's not to love My sister and I went for my 40th birthday, we had the best time.

Have a great time! Vegas is soooooooooooo much fun

I agree, for flu vaccines anyway. I think that for health workers, who would have a higher degree of exposure, it's probably a good idea. I've given my reasons for needing one. And I'll say again, everyone has to weight the risk/benefit to getting a flu vaccine and do what they think is best for themselves. For some, the possible risks outweigh the perceived benefits. More power to you. For others, it's the reverse. Ditto. I get a flu shot every year, except for last May when I got swine, I haven't had the flu. I get vaccinated for pneumonia, I haven't had pneumonia since I had the vaccine. Anecdotal evidence, for sure. But considering I used to get pneumonia once a year like clockwork before I had the vaccine, it's proof enough for me. But no one else should take my word as the gospel truth, because it's simply my opinion and my experience.

Actually, many vaccines are incredibly effective and safe (such as polio, mentioned above. There is really no study anywhere that conclusively links vaccines with anything, except a drop in that disease's rates. I'm not saying there isn't some sort of cause/effect somewhere, but it's conjecture at this point.

People have to be able to weigh to their own satisfaction the risk/benefit and do what they feel is best for THEMSELVES and their families. Not everyone is going to have the same risk/benefit equation.

It took a while I will say, though, that while I never really felt like I was in danger or anything, it was one of the most miserable illnesses I've ever had, if not the worst.

Frankly, I had the swine flu (or my docs are 99% sure anyway). It was MISERABLE!!!!!!!!!! And it took weeks to recover fully. And I was kindly requested to stay the hell home, which I gladly did. I quarantined myself.

Not saying anyone should or shouldn't have the vaccine. Just saying.

That's *** backward, going to bed at the crack of noon instead of getting up then

I'm finding conflicting reports on whether aluminum, aluminum salts, adjuvants, and thimerosol will be used. It seems the initial patents may have contained those ingredients but the actual product(s) don't, especially if you get the single-use vaccine.

I am not advocating one way or the other, I'm just saying that people should be armed with all the facts in order to make a healthy decision. And the facts seem to be that the above will not be used. The only "facts" I could find suggesting otherwise were people posting on message boards, stating their opinion as fact and those rumors spread like wildfire over the internet.

That doesn't mean, of course, that there isn't some legitimate cause for concern out there, it just means I couldn't find it.

More FAQ's pulled from CDC:

Will the 2009 H1N1 vaccines that are currently recommended contain adjuvants?
No. According to current federal plans, only unadjuvanted vaccines will be used in the United States during the 2009 flu season. This includes all of the 2009 H1N1 and seasonal influenza vaccines that will be available for children and adults in both the injectable and nasal spray formulations. None of these influenza vaccines will contain adjuvants.

2009 H1N1 vaccines with adjuvants are being studied to determine if they are safe and effective. Experts will review these data when they are available. There is no plan at this time to recommend a 2009 H1N1 influenza vaccine with an adjuvant.

Will the 2009 H1N1 influenza vaccine contain thimerosal?
The 2009 H1N1 influenza vaccines that FDA is licensing (approving) will be manufactured in several formulations. Some will come in multi-dose vials and will contain thimerosal as a preservative. Multi-dose vials of seasonal influenza vaccine also contain thimerosal to prevent potential contamination after the vial is opened.

Some 2009 H1N1 influenza vaccines will be available in single-dose units, which will not require the use of thimerosal as a preservative. In addition, the live-attenuated version of the vaccine, which is administered intranasally (through the nose), is produced in single-units and will not contain thimerosal. For more information on thimerosal.