Jump to content

Menu

Whereneverever

Members
  • Posts

    5,004
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Whereneverever

  1. Source? 

     

    I found this:  Immunizations — Fever can occur as a side effect of certain vaccines, particularly after measles mumps rubella (MMR) vaccination. The fever typically occurs 8 to 14 days after the injection [1].

     

    Apparently, it is more effective against the disease itself if you do delay over 15 months. 

     

    Those who were immunized at 12-13 months of age were found to have a 5-fold greater risk of getting measles than those who got the MMR at 15 months of age or later. One possible explanation for this is the persistence of maternal antibodies against measles. Maternal antibodies can attack the vaccine-strain virus, rendering the vaccine less effective. The lowered efficacy in subjects immunized at 12-14 month old was more noticeable in those children who were born to mothers who had immunity from infection instead of vaccination. From here  (first site I landed on, but study discussed in multiple places)

     

     

    http://archpedi.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1750204

     

    Source.

  2. Sure. 

     

    By that logic, why not just vaccinate a baby with everything at birth in the hospital while that child is still your captive audience (for the hospital birthers, anyway)?

     

    I should be quiet, as I am sure that there will be someone who will find this to be a good idea, regardless of safety to the child. 

     

    There's really no big issue here.  If you take your child in right at 18 months, fine.  If you take your child at 20 months, or 24 months...fine.  Or 2.5.  It makes very little difference. 

     

     

    But, that's not true. Kids who delay their first MMR past 15 months are MORE likely to have a febrile convulsion. 

     

    The recommendations do have reasons behind them. 

  3. I know I've posted this before. I have a child who was not vaccinated for medical reasons. It would still be preferable to not vaccinate- and I have a whole Children's Hospital of specialists who agree to that.

     

    It's no longer safe with herd immunity levels and we are vaccinating. It's scary. It's really scary. But kids with issues that make vaccination more dangerous are ALSO the kids that these diseases are more harmful for. 

     

    When outbreaks happen, kids are in the lurch. 

     

    And it's crappy. 

  4. I would also note that a lot of moms are single and have no choice but to take sick kids out.  I'll never forget the day we all had colds, and it was raining, and we ran out of milk.  Ugh!  Another time we were on the verge of running out of diapers, but I could not get a decent parking spot in the blizzard, and I wasn't willing to drag my sick babies through that.  Luckily I figured something out before the last diaper was used.

     

     

    OK. Again. I'm not talking about things like that. I'm talking voluntary social things. To be clear. 

  5. Since I send my kids to b&m school, there is a big penalty for staying home "sick."  Of course by the time you're puking you already infected everyone (and you probably caught it from school in the first place).  But you stay home, and then you get a huge pile of make-up work, and crap from the teacher about stuff she won't send home, and lower test scores because of the delay between studying and testing.

     

    Meanwhile the teacher has caught it and stayed home 1 day with her 3 sick offspring, then came back to school carrying all of her family's germs.  Hmm.  Have to say that ethics are a bit fuzzy in this context.

     

    I get this and I think that's different because of the attached penalties. I'm feeling crabbier about voluntary social things. 

  6. People who regularly attend social gatherings with sick kids? Does it annoy you more if your kids get sick?

     

    Asking as I sit here with a crop of kids going down... again. ;) Trying to see if my feelings are justified. 

  7. These threads come up a bit in google searches.

     

    If you go to the main forum page and scroll down to where you see who is on you can then click on "see full list."  This will show you oodles of guests and MANY older threads of all sorts that end up being looked at on any given day.

     

    The writer could be someone who is here and just not that great at reporting accurately or it could be someone who found the thread via a search engine and assumed the whole forum deals motherhood rather than homeschooling - but of course, labeled it as anti-vac "forum" instead of thread to make it sound more impressive.  Of course, they also might not know the difference between a forum and a thread if it's an older writer who isn't on much aside from quick searches.

     

    Ah, but searching on google and the like takes into account the sites you've previously visited. If I search incognito these forums don't come up in the vax debate stuff. Google metrics are a powerful thing. :)

  8. I expected her to be way younger than 15. My almost 11 year old does mother's helper things (here mother's helper vs babysitter mostly means that a parent is home vs home alone with kids) and is fully capable of playing with kids, making snacks and meals, and doing simple clean up without that much direction. It sounds like your particular mother's helper isn't that into it. 

  9. So you seriously see nothing wrong with the Hive being seen as a:

     

    "Looking at anti-vaccination and non-vaccination online forums"

     

    I see that label as identifying us (group) as anti-vac which is misleading.  It could have been stated far more accurately without adding tons of text, but noting that there are just a few with those beliefs and oodles who aren't wouldn't get the author's biased point across as strongly as implying there are anti-vac FORUMS out there.

     

    Honestly, I suspect that the writer is a member here, even as a lurker, based on picking the WTM over SO many other forums. This isn't a hugely known space. 

  10. So when most people think of a service dog, they think of a dog specifically chosen based on personality and intelligence, trained from puppyhood, and costing thousands of dollars. I also thought they were "on the job" and for a single person.  That certainly is one way to get a service dog.  It isn't the only way.  

     

    But before that (and ultimately, after that), I went to the service dog training place next to my gym one morning.  I told them that I was hoping to find a trainer who could help Heidi be "something more."  I didn't think service was a choice because I thought service dogs were done one way and cost way too much.  Besides, I already had the puppy (then 8 weeks old).  I told the woman that I had adopted some hurt children and we fostered.  I specifically wanted her to be able to help with PTSD, anxiety, etc.  She told me that that is what they did there, trained dogs, often specifically for PTSD of veterans.  

     

    In the end, I decided to wait.  I regret that decision, but.....

     

    When I did puppy training with Heidi, the woman who helped us had a terrier of some sort, a little older dog, who was trained to detect her blood sugar.  He also helped train other dogs.  She had trained him herself.  That was the first time I knew there was another option.  She said she could work with me to get Heidi where we needed her to be for my son (FASD and RAD)...the thinking was that a service dog is for a specific person.

     

    Then I really felt we needed the trainer the service dog place suggested (someone who actually worked there but did pet training on the side).  Valerie is our hero :)

     

    Sooooo, Heidi became MY service dog (still in training, technically) for Secondary PTSD.  She is also my children's "emotional support" dog (blowing out the "single job/person" belief). However, part of what has ALSO happened is that Josie (our Lhasa) has become an EXCELLENT emotional support dog.  Old dogs CAN be taught new tricks.

     

    On that note, I have noticed that many cardiac alert service dogs, diabetes service dogs, etc are smaller dogs. When they aren't opening a door, giving physical support, etc, they *can* be smaller dogs.  

     

    Anyway, what I've learned, though, is that service dogs can be a pet, even one who had behavioral issues, was "just a pet," etc.  So maybe the dog you already have could be trained?  Or maybe you can get help choosing a good dog to train?  Maybe there is a private service dog trainer locally.  A certified dog trainer can probably help you find one.  I could ask our trainer. 

     

    Soooo, if you did your service dog training privately, like this, you *wouldn't* be accepting a dog who could help someone else (though I think that is a non-issue as your child is just as worthy as someone, even one more affected.  But though I couldn't read through the whole thread yet, I know someone else has addressed that).  

     

    Hope this helps a little,

     

    Our current dog is an absolute love but he's a Saint Bernard and I don't think a dog that big would be easy for public access. I do want a midsized dog since a pretty common task for seizure dogs is helping steady someone post ictal. :)

     

    Thanks, though, and I'm so glad that your dogs are helping your family so much! Dogs are amazing. 

×
×
  • Create New...