A Vaccine Thread for EllaJac

[Patsy]

Bugger, sorry, my fault, I just... assumed you said that those who don't vaccinate only do so because THEIR kids haven't succumbed to those diseases (if they had that tragedy they'd see the error of their ways). Because there were some common words and I've heard people say that before. Misread :)

[aelar]

Yeah, I hear you on the emotional aspect. I'm 100% pro-getting-my-kid-vaccinated, and we delayed the newborn Hep B and a couple others an appointment or two based solely on the "Do you really have to poke my baby with all those needles??" factor. Our doc was fine with it because he knew we'd be back for the next well-baby appointment and not fall too far behind.

My baby is three weeks old, and this is what we're doing too. I'm also 100% pro-vaccination, but it just 'felt wrong' to put germs into my newborn, particularly as she was three weeks early and soooo tiny! I knew that I don't have Hep B, and neither does my husband, mom, or anyone else she will be spending a lot of time with, so since that one is a blood-based transmission method, I feel ok about delaying this one a bit. My doctor is fine with us delaying shots, and we'll just be taking things a tiny bit slower, doing the diseases that are more common in our area right on schedule, and the rare ones a bit behind schedule. We have Kaiser, so all the shots are done at the injection clinic, so it's no big deal to just drop by and get them whenever we want to, as long as we pay attention to keeping them the right number of months apart.

I also feel like, since many of these vaccines have to be given multiple times, it can be helpful to space them out a bit, especially the first dose, so if our daughter does have a bad reaction, we'll have fewer shots that might have caused it. I figure as time goes on, and she doesn't have bad reactions, and I just get used to having a baby, I'll probably be ok to get back on the schedule. In the meantime, altering the schedule is a means of managing my anxiety, and giving myself the psychologically important illusion of control, while not appreciably adding to her or anyone else's medical risk.

[Guest Anonymous]

I don't wanna pee in anyone's cornflakes, but shouldn't this be in the off-topic forum?

Oh, as far as vaccines go, I totally recommend The Vaccine Book: http://www.amazon.ca/Vaccine-Book-Makin ... 0316017507

And I totally support a parent's right to make up their own mind. The part that bothers me is when parents just do whatever they're told, be it by a doctor or someone on a mommy board.

Oh and this? " (Not to mention that a lot of kids who die from these diseases aren't the ones who weren't vaccinated... though for some WEIRD REASON, they tend to be ones who live around low-vaccinating areas.)"

I don't get this logic. If vaccines worked 100% of the time, then the vaccinated kids would be completely unaffected. If this is true, than it is an acknowledgement that vaccines must not work 100% of the time. It follows, then, that herd immunity is not infallible and non-vaxed kids are getting all the blame for something that could (and does) originate anywhere.

[Austin]

The vaccine issue is often intertwined with fundie beliefs as well as secular beliefs, so I'm not inclined to move it unless the OP requests it.

[apple1]

Bugger, sorry, my fault, I just... assumed you said that those who don't vaccinate only do so because THEIR kids haven't succumbed to those diseases (if they had that tragedy they'd see the error of their ways). Because there were some common words and I've heard people say that before. Misread :)

No offense taken. Just one of the hazards of trying to communicate- we all do it sometimes. :D

[Patsy]

Oh and this? " (Not to mention that a lot of kids who die from these diseases aren't the ones who weren't vaccinated... though for some WEIRD REASON, they tend to be ones who live around low-vaccinating areas.)"

I don't get this logic. If vaccines worked 100% of the time, then the vaccinated kids would be completely unaffected. If this is true, than it is an acknowledgement that vaccines must not work 100% of the time. It follows, then, that herd immunity is not infallible and non-vaxed kids are getting all the blame for something that could (and does) originate anywhere.

Vaccinations do not work 100%. This is not at all contraversial. Herd immunity requires a large enough immunity to serve everyone. Basic idea (if anyone has further details please tell us): If vaccinations make 90% of people ~100% protected, the 10% could still get it and pass it around to one another. The more people who are vaccinated, the less likely that is to happen. If you have a fuckton of anti-vaxers in the area, herd immunity goes down.

If you're living in an area where 50% of kids aren't vaccinated against whooping cough, there's a much larger of people around who can catch it, and so it goes around, and so your vaccinated kid could catch it as it runs around. They could even get it from a string of unvaccinated kids who didn't suffer terribly from the symptoms, but still were able to pass it on. And yes, they could even get it from a string of vaccinated kids who weren't 100% immune, but that's a lot less likely than kids with no vaccination. Your baby too young to yet be vaccinated and therefore relying on herd immunity could also catch it, and die, as has happened here in a hippy area of NSW. Same for the previously mentioned kids with special reasons not to vaccinate, people with immune disorders, etc. They are depending on the rest of society to keep them alive.

[apple1]

Vaccinations do not work 100%. This is not at all contraversial. Herd immunity requires a large enough immunity to serve everyone. Basic idea (if anyone has further details please tell us): If vaccinations make 90% of people ~100% protected, the 10% could still get it and pass it around to one another. The more people who are vaccinated, the less likely that is to happen. If you have a fuckton of anti-vaxers in the area, herd immunity goes down.

If you're living in an area where 50% of kids aren't vaccinated against whooping cough, there's a much larger of people around who can catch it, and so it goes around, and so your vaccinated kid could catch it as it runs around. They could even get it from a string of unvaccinated kids who didn't suffer terribly from the symptoms, but still were able to pass it on. And yes, they could even get it from a string of vaccinated kids who weren't 100% immune, but that's a lot less likely than kids with no vaccination. Your baby too young to yet be vaccinated and therefore relying on herd immunity could also catch it, and die, as has happened here in a hippy area of NSW. Same for the previously mentioned kids with special reasons not to vaccinate, people with immune disorders, etc. They are depending on the rest of society to keep them alive.

Patsy, Your explanation is 100% correct. And there have been similar instances in the US at various times.

Even the hospital where I work had a pertussis outbreak a few years ago before they started enforcing employee vaccination quite so rigorously. (Can we say litigation potential?)

[BlackHawk]

I'll throw my opinion in the ring as someone preparing for all things baby. We plan to space out vaxing. Why? Because. Simple as that really. Is there a real need to poke a kid 7 or 8 times in one appt? No. My cousin freaked out when I told her, telling me I was going to ruin my child and they would be sick and HER child would be making up for the vaccines we miss... but we don't plan to miss any (with exception to the chicken pox vaccine for right now). She also complained when her son had 5 different needle pokes in one appt.

We are adopting, thus we have to go about this carefully. Because in my state your adoption isn't finalized for X amount of months after guardianship is acquired, we have a ton of forms to fill out. After TPR is granted between 30-60 days we will have an easier time getting our wishes validated by SS. But until the finalization of our adoption we have a fine line to tread. I understand why, but at the same time it makes me angry.

My partner is all for vaccinating on schedule. He also thinks when a doctor says it you either pay attention or die. A medicine hurts your stomach to the point you can't stand up? That's okay, the doctor prescribed it, just take it and shut up. He is an awesome guy but his parents taught him this way and it's a long path to retrain him that your opinion counts with everyone, including doctors.

[demgirl]

And I totally support a parent's right to make up their own mind.

This is where I get a bit conflicted. I'm not sure I do support this, but it's hard for me to say that, because generally I think parents should be permitted to make up their own minds for their own children, within reasonable boundaries. The question I guess is one of reasonable boundaries. I know that I don't think children should be permitted in school without vaccines, unless there is a medical reason why they can't have them (I don't even agree with the religious exemption, though perhaps I shouldn't say that.) I also don't think they should be permitted (always exempting medical reasons) in camps and other places with many children they will be in close contact with.

OTOH, I don't think anyone should have a vaccine forcibly administered on themselves or their children nor do I think that children should be taken away from their parents simply because the parents won't vaccinate the children.

I have said this before, but I guess I will say it again -- I probably wouldn't let my children play with kids that I knew were not vaccinated, although I doubt it would be the first question out of my mouth when arranging a play date.

[Austin]

Vaccinations do not work 100%. This is not at all contraversial. Herd immunity requires a large enough immunity to serve everyone. Basic idea (if anyone has further details please tell us): If vaccinations make 90% of people ~100% protected, the 10% could still get it and pass it around to one another. The more people who are vaccinated, the less likely that is to happen. If you have a fuckton of anti-vaxers in the area, herd immunity goes down.

If you're living in an area where 50% of kids aren't vaccinated against whooping cough, there's a much larger of people around who can catch it, and so it goes around, and so your vaccinated kid could catch it as it runs around. They could even get it from a string of unvaccinated kids who didn't suffer terribly from the symptoms, but still were able to pass it on. And yes, they could even get it from a string of vaccinated kids who weren't 100% immune, but that's a lot less likely than kids with no vaccination. Your baby too young to yet be vaccinated and therefore relying on herd immunity could also catch it, and die, as has happened here in a hippy area of NSW. Same for the previously mentioned kids with special reasons not to vaccinate, people with immune disorders, etc. They are depending on the rest of society to keep them alive.

This is my understanding of basic herd immunity. It's all about reducing likelihoods. No one is arguing that any chance can be totally eliminated by widespread vaccination, but depending upon the rates of vaccination, something like whooping cough can be significantly decreased so that those too young or too sick to receive the vaccine are then protected because most other people are not likely to spread the disease.

And to Blackhawk's point, I don't see anything wrong with spacing vaccines. The schedule is the recommended one, but my doctor had no problem with us spacing so that our children didn't receive five or six vaccines on the same day or even in the same month. We were still able to complete the recommended vaccines by kindergarten, with the exception of Hep B which we did not start until around kindergarten. At that time, Hep B was not a required vaccine, just a recommended one. I don't know if that has changed or not.

[apple1]

I'll throw my opinion in the ring as someone preparing for all things baby. We plan to space out vaxing. Why? Because. Simple as that really. Is there a real need to poke a kid 7 or 8 times in one appt?

FTR The "standard" vax schedule is NOT 7 or 8 needle pokes in one appointment- it's generally 2 or 3 for an infant. Some vaccines are combinations (like DTaP), some are oral (rotavirus), some are nasal.

Here is an alternative schedule (by a reputable pediatrician) to consider...

http://www.askdrsears.com/topics/vaccin ... e-schedule

[StarrieEyedKat]

FTR The "standard" vax schedule is NOT 7 or 8 needle pokes in one appointment- it's generally 2 or 3 for an infant. Some vaccines are combinations (like DTaP), some are oral (rotavirus), some are nasal.

Here is an alternative schedule (by a reputable pediatrician) to consider...

http://www.askdrsears.com/topics/vaccin ... e-schedule

That was going to be my point as well...who the hell is giving kids 7-8 shots all at once? I've done standard vax for two kids now, and the most they've been jabbed at an appointment was 3 times, and that was after they missed the previous set.

[bekkah]

I am all for vaxing children. I do believe that parents should be able to create a vax plan for their children though. Until these anti vax people see photo after photo of children seriously ill. I have seen the horribleness of small pox then have to discuss the disease symptoms in biology class. Understanding how the symptoms perptuate the reproduction cycle and how it becomes dangerous to several people around. The World Health Organization meets and discuss what diseases should be eradicated. There is many criteria and the vaxs are monitored for years before they become standard practices. WHO is not run by the US gov't or any gov't agency, it is independent.

[Terrie]

Dr. Sears has ZERO evidence for his alternative schedule. The standard schedule has been developed as the best one, based on evidence. I get feeling guilty about poking a child with needles, but I'd much rather they suffer through the prick of a needle than the diseases vaccines are meant to protect from.

[dcmhejbl62]

Yet another piece of anti-vac "evidence" that doesn't have a damn thing to do with vaccinations. Anybody who has been exposed to the varicella virus (whether by contracting chicken pox or getting the varicella vaccine) can get shingles. As a child, I came down with chicken pox twice and had shingles at ten years old. Kids who get the vaccine, then get shingles don't mean jack squat.

Hmmm. My nurse-anesthesiologist cousin vehemently disagrees with this. She used to work in a pediatrician's office and saw the cases of childhood shingles jump dramatically with the vaccine. Freaked her out enough to call and talk to me about it, the family vaccine whacko.

It's similar to why parent started questioning our vaccine protocol; it wasn't just one kid getting autism after "touching the white rabbit;" it was thousands.

[lovefromgirl]

Even if kids are getting jabbed seven times in one appointment, below a certain age, will they even remember it? The first shot I remember is polio, aged 5, because I reacted oddly to it--right arm was useless for a week. I know I got all the shots I needed; heck, because I was precocious and diseases were my hobby, I learned to ask for them. ("Daddy, are you sure we don't need the smallpox one?" I thought my mum's scar was the coolest. Bekkah is, by the way, spot on about smallpox. It looks horrific and it is horrific. We're better off without it.) My dad actually got plague from one of his wartime vaccinations. He and Mum still made sure I had everything I needed. Bad reactions happen, like plane crashes happen. And we were in a plane that nearly went down, too, and we kept flying. Mostly the technology is safe in both cases; the benefits vastly outweigh the risks.

There's also a question of responsibility to society versus personal choice. Where does my right to choose end? I say it ends where my decisions put someone else at risk, in this case those who cannot receive vaccinations. I might get a bad reaction, but my "might" is tiny compared to what would happen if a preventable illness ran through the population. I'd want the same courtesy if I were unable to receive a vaccination, for whatever reason. What's that popular Christian saying? "Do unto others..."?

[dcmhejbl62]

Dr. Sears has ZERO evidence for his alternative schedule. The standard schedule has been developed as the best one, based on evidence. I get feeling guilty about poking a child with needles, but I'd much rather they suffer through the prick of a needle than the diseases vaccines are meant to protect from.

Where is the evidence for the standard schedule?

[formergothardite]

So back to EllaJac. I read this post on her blog and was extremely disturbed by it, as I am by most anti-vaccine and anti-population health and development commentary. Better health=fewer children born, because many women in the developing world don't want to reproduce unchecked until they drop. Women in the developing world, like women with children everywhere, love their kids, want them to be healthy, and want them to have opportunities - not die before their fifth birthday. Those who rail against increased access to vaccines and reproductive health care, in my opinion, have very little concern for the dignity, well-being, and self-determination of women in the developing world.

Would love to hear EllaJac's response.

In the other thread she said that parents didn't have kids to see them grow into adults. :doh: Which is pretty much one of the most sick, unChrist-like statements ever. And then she tossed her hair and flounced because we are a bunch of meanie pants.

[Jessica]

In the other thread she said that parents didn't have kids to see them grow into adults. :doh: Which is pretty much one of the most sick, unChrist-like statements ever. And then she tossed her hair and flounced because we are a bunch of meanie pants.

:shock: :o :evil: :naughty: Um... WOW. My brain can't even comprehend that!

[formergothardite]

Her exact words were: "most women don't have children so they can see them to adulthood." Personally, I didn't have children so I could see them die in childhood, but maybe that wouldn't bother her?

[MonkeyMomma]

Her exact words were: "most women don't have children so they can see them to adulthood." Personally, I didn't have children so I could see them die in childhood, but maybe that wouldn't bother her?

Uh, yeah, what? Why do most women have children, then? To watch them die slowly of preventable diseases? That kind of stuff just makes my stomach turn.

[Guest Anonymous]

I just know from experience that the choice about whether or not to vaccinate is a really tough one. I don't think any decent parent goes into it lightly because there are well-documented risks to both vaccinating and not vaccinating. It doesn't do anybody any good to get all uppity about it and call others out on their decisions because they're different than the ones you yourself made.

I'm not talking about this EllaJac chick and her conspiracy theories, and all the whackadoo she posts about the Gates Foundation. That's typical fundieblog loopyness, to me, and is totally not reflective of the average intelligent, reasonable parent.

Also, I came across this list the other day and it's definitely food for thought: http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_5uh8z4eThkQ/T ... 9352_n.jpg

It leads me to ask, for those of you with children, did you make sure you were completely up to date with your boosters and flu shots before getting pregnant? Did you ensure that the baby's grandparents, aunts, uncles, caregivers, and all of your friends were as well, before they came into contact with your child? I'm curious to hear from those who say that they wouldn't let their children play with unvaccinated kids. Many vaccine-indued immunities weaken over time, so it's not just unvaccinated kids you need to worry about, it's pretty much everybody over the age of 30-ish, too. I remember reading recently that many of the worst cases of tetanus in North America are actually not in unvaccinated kids, but in elderly people who have been vaccinated but haven't kept up-to-date on their boosters. Also, their immune systems tend to be weaker. I know tetanus isn't a communicable disease, I just thought it was quite interesting, because in most vaccination debates people don't bring up adults.

I know I don't have any more than those ten or so shots that were mandatory when I was a child. This is also true for the vast majority of the North American population right now, excluding young kids. My question, I guess, is - are 36 vaccines really neccessary? How many is too many, and will it ever stop, or will my grandchildren be getting 56 different shots? And how can we expect to give young children 36 different vaccines and NOT have people questioning it?

"The standard schedule has been developed as the best one, based on evidence."

Ah, see, this is what worries me. I'm 25 years old, and I had most of my vaccines in the late '80's, early '90's. Many of the vaccines on the standard schedule weren't even developed at that point - only 20 years ago. The ones that were on that schedule have been completely reforrmulated. What kind of long-term effects does the standard schedule hold? Well, nobody knows, because in the whole history of vaccinations, they're pretty much brand new. Will there be any ill effects for these children at 20? 30? 40? 50? I guess we just have to hope that there won't be.

FWIW, I do vaccinate my kids. Just in case you all think I'm some paranoid hippy-dippy just because I have questions and concerns.

Ummm, and why are we discussing smallpox here as if it's something non-vaxing parents are putting everyone at risk for? That vaccine hasn't been on the standard vaccine schedule for a while, it's not widely given anymore.

[dcmhejbl62]

Wow, times have changed.

I used to be the anti-vaccine nutjob in these conversations, but y'all have included enough exceptions in your statements that I'm not sure I disagree with much.

1. I was militantly pro-vaccine and trusted my doctor completely with my oldest. Also all the government-approved materials at the time said they were perfectly safe, I'm pretty sure in those exact words, so I assumed they were. The first clue I had was when I was holding the baby down with one hand and being asked to sign a consent form, without time to read it, with the other. No joke.

2. Nasty side effects were common back then because they were still using live viruses in a lot of vaccines. We didn't have children's Advil, so we pumped Tylenol in them for 24 hours before and after vaccines. They would still get breakthrough fevers. Doctors rigorously held to the published schedule; sick kids were injected without a second thought, although sometimes allowances were made for a high fever. Example: my son had jaundice until he was 2 1/2 months old, and received all his shots on time. Can you see all the potential problems stacking up here?

3. Anti-vaxers, autism folk, were not easy to find. The internet wasn't widely used yet. If a parent thought her child developed a problem after a vaccine, she often thought she was the ONLY one, and therefore had her doubts.

4. It took a LOT of self-education and research -- real research, again, before anyone's half-stoned brother could start a legit-looking website full of crap -- to find out what was wrong and what would help our kids. So I get REAL perturbed when people imply my positions on the issue are due to laziness, gullibility, lack of intelligence, or a lack of knowledge about vaccine-preventable illnesses.

5. None of my kids have autism. All but the youngest have or have had various problems I believe were triggered by vaccines. We have a strong history of life-threatening allergies, asthma, and auto-immune diseases all throughout the family, and it was never once suggested we delay or selectively vaccinate; in fact we were fired by one pediatrician for not vaxing our youngest, despite the family history.

6. Recently we discovered I have a very rare dominant genetic neuro-muscular disease that is progressive. It warrants only a paragraph or two on WebMD because that's all that's known about it. It contains all the factors necessary to be a do-not-vaccinate disease, yet genetic tests for it have only been available about 10 years, and we only found out because one child started showing severe symptoms (unrelated to vaccines). So to all the doctors who harangued and guilted and yelled at me about my choice -- I WAS RIGHT, DAMMIT!!!

And it begs the question -- how many other kids are genetically predisposed to problems with vaccines? Instead of telling millions of parents they are full of shit when they make a connection between vaccines and symptoms, why isn't someone figuring out who can safely be vaccinated, and who can't?

I guess I may still be the nutjob. 8-)

[emmiedahl]

I have been known to hold off on certain vaccines and to space things out a little more. These are issues that I discuss with my doctor, and he gives me input and then respects my decision.

Some pro-vax anecdate: I let my kids play with unvaccinated children. I am not going to make my friends show proof of shots before we have a playdate for heaven's sake. A few years ago there was a pertussis outbreak in my local homeschool community. All of the unvaccinated children caught it and none of the vaccinated children did.

My friend's healthy perfect baby at six months (around the time you get that MMR) developed an illness with a high fever and then turned into a withdrawn, severely autistic child almost overnight. Was it caused by the MMR? Nope, she doesn't believe in vaccinations because she thought they were linked to autism. That's when that particular genetic switch tends to get flipped. It's unfortunate and I don't want to make light of it... but if she had decided to vaccinate, it would certainly have been blamed on that.

[jericho]

3) I am old enough to know of the polio epidemics that occurred regularly in the summer. I have a relative slightly older than me that is handicapped (requires braces/crutches to walk) from having polio. I am sorry, those who are totally against vaccination have their fingers in their ears and are singing la la la la la. Vaccination (again, appropriate, of course). And yes, smallpox HAS been eradicated-- guess how?

I would be interested in hearing response about the charts on this page which seem to show Polio, Measles and Pertussis on their way down before the vaccines were introduced.

http://www.thehealthyhomeeconomist.com/2011/01/why-vaccines-are-scientific-fraud/