Jump to content

Menu

measles outbreak...


gardenmom5

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Æthelthryth the Texan said:

Without knowing how you are defining the bolded, as far as incidence, prevalence and risk, it is difficult to discuss. I'm not saying that it- the discussion- shouldn't be done. But I think in many cases people aren't using the same definitions and it only muddies the waters.  I would never consider the MMR neuro data to show significant incidence. What statistic is that coming from? I will admit my statistical bias coming in as a former public health worker. My degrees are in public health and infectious disease, so I am going to view that data through that slant, which is likely to be different than a mother who has a different background. However, the statistics are the statistics. And that's where I think things aren't necessarily being presented clearly- and that does happen sometimes with both side. 

According to statistics cited in one of the linked articles, roughly 0.01% of people who get measles die from it, and since measles is more dangerous to older people, the rate may be less for otherwise healthy children between ages 2 and 4.  Couple that with he very low measles incidence we have today, and the risk of a delayed vax child becoming seriously ill or even making another person ill is quite remote.  But when I was given a CDC handout on MMR, it said the incidence of neurological injury (iirc) was 5%. That's 5% of almost all the millions of kids in the USA.  Higher for kids who happen to be more vulnerable than others - and we don't yet know who those kids are.

You are correct that more and clearer information is needed.  I was that mom who was scoffed at when I asked the doctor "can we talk about this?"  That's not the way to do this, as others in the thread have said.

FTR my kids were vaxed at age 2.5 (for MMR).  If they caught measles at age 1 or 2, I assume they would be in the "unvaxed" category which is angering so many people right now.
 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, gardenmom5 said:

not as easy as you think.    those who provide the vaccination must send their records to the state, they give the "booklet/form" to the parent for the parents record- the state has it's own.  

And schools are actually checking state record for compliance? It’s  hard to imagine my son’s college went back and checked with three different states to see if his vaccination records were actually true. Especially considering that the day he submitted the form, his registration hold was cleared.

Edited by Frances
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Ktgrok said:

And the idea that a kid will have a stronger immune system by getting the disease is just plain wrong, at least with measles. It actually wipes out the immune system's memory and takes years to recover. In fact, a lot of deaths are to things like flu afterwards, because the body has no antibodies to anything for a while. It's like immune amnesia. 

I am someone who spaces vaccines out a bit more (but does combo vaccines, so it doesn't make a huge difference to do one injection per visit, with some extra visits). But I understand the reason we vaccinate and support it, I just have hold overs from working in veterinary medicine that make me feel that it is better to separate them out if possible so you get a lower adjuvant load at once. (hence me okay with combo vaccines but not multiple injections). 
 

I do think that as long as the medical establishment pretends reactions don't exist they will never make headway in the arguments with anti-vaxxers. They need to instead acknowledge that vaccine reactions happen, and can be serious, but..here is what we are doing to try to prevent them, here is what vaccine we suggest and why and why it is unlikely your child will have a reaction, and what to do if they DO have a reaction. Maybe a bit of education on the advances in vaccine technology, and how newer vaccines have a much lower antigen load than old ones, so even with more vaccines it isn't more antigen. 

 

Honestly, I think this is one of the biggest problems; the unwillingness of risks to ever be admitted. What they do is scare people off completely because side effects DO happen, and if they’re not willing to say so, people will assume everything else is a lie.

The other thing is the lack of admission that vaccines such as this one (MMR) are able to transmit the virus themselves, so the recently vaccinated are a risk as well. To not make that widely known is, IMO, extremely irresponsible. 

There are some studies that show having measles actually lowers your risks for certain cancers later in life. I saw it recently, although I’m not sure where the study is from - would have to look that up. 

I think if there were more transparency and truth, people would be less skeptical.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Sneezyone said:

 

YES!! My Cousin is a nurse for a children's charity in Haiti. Vaccines mean life to Haitians who live in poverty and they are eager to receive them for their children. We are so.freaking.spoiled!

 

Are we really comparing the US to non-first-world countries though when it comes to disease? It’s not quite apples to apples just based on health and hygiene factors alone. When we are looking at risks vs benefit, we should be focusing on the US, and not using other countries for comparison.

I agree we take things for granted, but that’s also because we do have access to better care than many other countries as well.

Of course, overall, if you look at our mortality rates in infants, we aren’t really doing that great, and we certainly give a lot more vaccines, and start them a lot sooner, than many countries that rank much higher.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Æthelthryth the Texan said:

I don't disagree with you on the vaccine to vaccine. But it's tricky. 

Hep B for instance, can be transmitted vertically as well- from mother to infant- so that is yet another impetus that plays into people getting vaccinated and doing it before they are sexually active or at greater risk for drug use. And then add underage sexual abuse, and that's another facet. Then add that high risk individuals usually don't come back later and seek vaccination. And with the percentage of sexually active teens, you have an inroads there. It's not like teens only have sex with teens. There are all of these overlapping risk groups. Couple that with increasing incidence of IV drug use over decades, and that is wehere some of the justification comes from.

I'm not saying it shouldn't/can't be dealt with on a case by case basis. But when you are dealing with Public Health, in the overarching realm, you aren't dealing with case by case. You're dealing with the Greater Good, so to speak. So you can't really have it both ways. You either have individualism, or you have more of a public good focused approach. It's really hard to have both, because that isn't the way infectious disease works. And as a mother, I get both sides. But it really is not a simple issue to suss out, especially when someone's child is the one who was hurt doing what everyone told them they needed to do to be a good parent. I get that.

There aren't easy answers really. But is the kid who was prevented from getting Hep B at birth by his drug using mother who happened to receive her Hep B vaccine by rote at birth, worth more or less another my kid? It's all risk at the end of the day and people- and I'm not saying I'm not one of them- want a no risk world. Unfortunately, we can't have it. 

Right now, it's given on the very first day of life. For all babies. Not just the mothers with Hep B infections themselves. I'm not talking about preventing the at-risk child from getting the vaccine. I specifically mentioned using it in high-risk populations. I'm talking about the current CDC recommendations for this vaccine when research is showing there is a significant risk associated with this vaccine. When I told the hospital I wanted to postpone the Hep B vaccine, the nurse acted like I'd just told her I planned to go home and feed my child to the wolves. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm exceedingly practical, so although I don't know all of the science behind it (I'm pretty science-y, but I do not have the gumption to read through every journal/competing theories), my kids are vaccinated simply because if they ever died or were permanently harmed (ie: deafness from measles, etc) from a vaccine-avoidable disease, I know that I would never forgive myself. However, having said that, I agree that doctors need to open up a little and discuss parents' fears. 

I actually have a daughter who reacted very strongly to her flu shot done at Walgreens this year. She happened to have a height/weight checkup the next day at the nurse practioner's office. She was running a 101.5 fever, felt terrible, and looked even worse at her appointment. I explained that she had had her flu shot the day before, and this was a normal response for her to most vaccines. We know to give her 3 days after most vaccines to recuperate; the responses never get worse than a fever and raging headache though. The NP insisted that she must have had some virus that coincidentally showed up the day after her vaccine. She wouldn't even entertain the notion that perhaps it could possibly have been the shot even though she has this reaction to about 75% of vaccines. Fortunately, we were able to space her vaccines out a little more than normal due to having a doctor who allowed it. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Sneezyone said:

 

That's just it. I don't feel for these people at all. This is not a tough call for healthy kids. I feel for the millions around the world who are dying because they DON'T have the option to vaccinate or keep their children isolated at home. These are totally first world problems.

 

Not a tough call for healthy kids? Tell that to a mom whose perfectly normal 2 month old is injected with what, 7-8 vaccines at ONCE and then dies from “SIDS” within 24-36 hours. You can be rude and hateful about people making their own choices all you want, but these reactions can and DO happen, and a parent should be able to decide how and if they want to dump that load of toxins in their 10 lb baby or not.

  • Like 14
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, EmseB said:

Do you know how amazing this is, though? Children being protected from more diseases at a younger age? I do realize it and I thank God, literally, that I live in a place and time where such amazing scientific advancement means I don't have to endure the almost inevitable infant deaths of just three, four generations ago. Anytime I see that side-by-side list of then and now vaccines posted to FB in order to fear-monger I want to comment how absolute glad I am that my kids get more shots.

What I think people don't realize is that our life expectancy has gone up in recent years, not primarily because people live so much longer, but because people don't get diseases and die when they are under 5yo anywhere near as much as it used to happen.

 

I don’t think that’s amazing - I think it’s awful the amount of toxins that are injected into tiny babies. I also think if we look at the rates of other diseases, like the ridiculous amounts of autoimmune disease there is today, we can’t pretend these attacks on their immune systems are risk-free.

So maybe your kid doesn’t catch a vaccine preventable illness, but instead lives a life with diabetes (and its own risks), or an autoimmune disease that affects them daily for their entire lives. How do we really compare the benefit of one over the other?

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Æthelthryth the Texan said:

 

The thing with measles is it's so contagious and lingers so long in the air, it's not necessarily something that kids are only at risk for once they are preschool age, or school age. Almost everyone got it before the vaccine- sort of like HPV. It's that prevalent in pre-vaccine communities. So non-immune people are at risk if they go to a grocery store, a church, or anything else really out in public from the moment they're born. And planes. Oh man, planes and measles is not fun to contemplate. So to me MMR is not the same playing field as say Hep B or even chicken pox. Those have a much more arguable basis imo for delay or exclusion, in the the risk levels are totally different. Measels is a total crap shoot. 

 

Very true, and again where the all or nothing approach hurts vaccination levels. I really really wish I were seeing doctors, clinics, etc saying, "I know you have concerns about overvacciation. We are willing to discuss a schedule that works for you, but due to the heightened risk of measles currently, are offering MMR vaccines to everyone, no questions asked"

1 hour ago, Æthelthryth the Texan said:

I don't think I've come even close to saying anything of this sort. Ever. 

No, but LOTS of people do. Check out the comments section of any article about measels. 

38 minutes ago, SKL said:

But on the other hand, the MMR has proven to cause a significant incidence of neurological injuries in babies.  That coupled with the very low incidence of the disease and low death rate means it is not a black and white question - especially for those who have a family history of vaccine injury or who have other concerns related to their kids' specific health situation. 

Right. We delayed that one for my oldest, because he was showing signs of possible neuropsychiatric symptoms already, had at least one food allergy or intolerance with multiple systems effected, and had a father with a known autoimmune disease, and possibly a second autoimmune disease, with the possibility of them being passed on genetically but no way to know if our son had them until he was older. Discussing with our pediatrician we waited until 2 yrs old for MMR, rather than 1, as she felt the immune system was a bit more mature at that age, something bout the blood brain barrier (this was 19 years ago, so memory is spotty about the exact reasons we chose that age) and he'd have more exposure to others by that point. Also, at that point in time, we were not having all these outbreaks of measles. With my other kids, who were not having neuropsychiatric issues, and who had a different father so different genetic profile, and with more measles outbreaks, we did it on time. 

22 minutes ago, DesertBlossom said:

I have found this to be true as well. And I don't think most people have any idea exactly how many vaccines are on the CDC's recommended schedule today. People talk about measles, mumps, polio and whooping cough and then talk about "requiring vaccination" without realizing just how many more vaccines are on the schedule. If we're going to have an honest discussion about vaccines, you really have to talk about them individually. The diseases they prevent aren't all equal, the risks vs benefits isn't going to be identical for each one, they each have unique ingredients, etc. 

For example, Hep B is not easily spread to others. It's an STD, sometimes transmitted via drug needles. A recent study came out and suggested the Hep B vaccine could cause neurological damage in infants. Why aren't we talking about this? The Hep B is easily postponed until later in life, or used only in high-risk populations. But people are too busy yelling "vaccinate your damn kids" to have a real conversation about the concerns and issues that parents have.

YES!!!!! I've been labeled all sorts of terrible things because my kids are not fully vaccinated and on schedule. But when they find out that what I mean is I do Hep B last and we didn't do rotavirus as at the time there were issues with the vaccine and my pediatrician wasn't even giving it, and didn't recommend it for babies not in daycare, etc...well then they start stuttering because they don't know what rotavirus even IS and never have been vaccinated for Hepatitis B themselves despite being way higher risk than my small child, and start saying how they "just mean Measles and stuff". Well, than SAY that. Don't go around acting sanctimonious and attacking others when you have no idea what you are even talking about. 

17 minutes ago, SKL said:

According to statistics cited in one of the linked articles, roughly 0.01% of people who get measles die from it, and since measles is more dangerous to older people, the rate may be less for otherwise healthy children between ages 2 and 4.  Couple that with he very low measles incidence we have today, and the risk of a delayed vax child becoming seriously ill or even making another person ill is quite remote.  But when I was given a CDC handout on MMR, it said the incidence of neurological injury (iirc) was 5%. That's 5% of almost all the millions of kids in the USA.  Higher for kids who happen to be more vulnerable than others - and we don't yet know who those kids are.

You are correct that more and clearer information is needed.  I was that mom who was scoffed at when I asked the doctor "can we talk about this?"  That's not the way to do this, as others in the thread have said.

FTR my kids were vaxed at age 2.5 (for MMR).  If they caught measles at age 1 or 2, I assume they would be in the "unvaxed" category which is angering so many people right now.
 

For the record, no, the risk of the MMR vaccine is no where NEAR 5%. Biggest risk is febrile seizure, or thrombocytopenia (something we saw in dogs with vaccine reactions as well). https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/meas.html#reactions

13 minutes ago, StaceyinLA said:

 

I think if there were more transparency and truth, people would be less skeptical.

This, being dismissive creates mistrust. Trust is what is needed. 

11 minutes ago, Æthelthryth the Texan said:

I don't disagree with you on the vaccine to vaccine. But it's tricky. 

Hep B for instance, can be transmitted vertically as well- from mother to infant- so that is yet another impetus that plays into people getting vaccinated and doing it before they are sexually active or at greater risk for drug use. And then add underage sexual abuse, and that's another facet. Then add that high risk individuals usually don't come back later and seek vaccination. And with the percentage of sexually active teens, you have an inroads there. It's not like teens only have sex with teens. There are all of these overlapping risk groups. Couple that with increasing incidence of IV drug use over decades, and that is wehere some of the justification comes from.

I'm not saying it shouldn't/can't be dealt with on a case by case basis. But when you are dealing with Public Health, in the overarching realm, you aren't dealing with case by case. You're dealing with the Greater Good, so to speak. So you can't really have it both ways. You either have individualism, or you have more of a public good focused approach. It's really hard to have both, because that isn't the way infectious disease works. And as a mother, I get both sides. But it really is not a simple issue to suss out, especially when someone's child is the one who was hurt doing what everyone told them they needed to do to be a good parent. I get that.

There aren't easy answers really. But is the kid who was prevented from getting Hep B at birth by his drug using mother who happened to receive her Hep B vaccine by rote at birth, worth more or less another my kid? It's all risk at the end of the day and people- and I'm not saying I'm not one of them- want a no risk world. Unfortunately, we can't have it. 

This is why individual doctors should be able to have that discussion with parents, and not be required to blindly follow a one size fits all schedule. I totally get that public health sometimes dictates something different than what is best for my kid, but I want my doctor to admit that and be willing to personalize things, and for people to admit that doing so isn't anti science, or moronic, or putting the world at risk. 

6 minutes ago, beckyjo said:

I actually have a daughter who reacted very strongly to her flu shot done at Walgreens this year. She happened to have a height/weight checkup the next day at the nurse practioner's office. She was running a 101.5 fever, felt terrible, and looked even worse at her appointment. I explained that she had had her flu shot the day before, and this was a normal response for her to most vaccines. We know to give her 3 days after most vaccines to recuperate; the responses never get worse than a fever and raging headache though. The NP insisted that she must have had some virus that coincidentally showed up the day after her vaccine. She wouldn't even entertain the notion that perhaps it could possibly have been the shot even though she has this reaction to about 75% of vaccines. Fortunately, we were able to space her vaccines out a little more than normal due to having a doctor who allowed it. 

 

Yes, my oldest gets sick for 3-5 days after a flu vaccine, so we don't do it for him anymore. He's REALLY sick each time, and it's not worth it, given that he is in a bracket to survive a flu infection fairly easily, has access to medical treatment quickly if he is ill, we can and would get him tamiflu if need be, wouldn't let him get dehydrated, can monitor his vital signs at home and go to ER if need be, etc. But I also get that there are people who are not in that situation, and the vaccine is their best shot at protection. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is not a problem in my area finding a doctor who is willing to discuss the issues, answer questions, and possibly modify schedules.  To me, that is not a vaccination issue, but a general doctor issue.  I have seen doctors before who don't like being questioned, period.  They will not be my doctor.  Those are likely the same type of doctors who are not willing to answer questions about vaccinations either.  Some doctors respect patients and some don't.  We fully vaccinated on schedule, but my kid was healthy and neurotypical.  I don't have a problem with modified schedules, and no problem with health-related choices. (Edit: health-related referring to existing medical conditions or at-risk situations)

I am not in favor ever of forcing parents to vaccinate, period.  A parent should have that choice, however they arrive at it.  But as far as requiring vaccinations for public school, colleges, and other areas where kids are in contact, I am in favor of health exemptions only, not ideological.  You have the right to make that choice, but not to inflict your choice on my kid, or anyone else's kid.  Choices and freedom have consequences.  Your choice not to vaccinate having consequences does not equal forcing you to vaccinate.

Edited by goldberry
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, StaceyinLA said:

 

Not a tough call for healthy kids? Tell that to a mom whose perfectly normal 2 month old is injected with what, 7-8 vaccines at ONCE and then dies from “SIDS” within 24-36 hours. You can be rude and hateful about people making their own choices all you want, but these reactions can and DO happen, and a parent should be able to decide how and if they want to dump that load of toxins in their 10 lb baby or not.

What I find interesting is that it is a known and accepted thing in veterinary medicine that body size effects risk of reactions, and that smaller dogs should have their vaccines split up. And that multiple injections at once increases the risk of reaction. And that vaccines are a known trigger of autoimmune conditions. 

And yet, in human medicine, if you say that you are an idiot who is anti science. Um..huh? 

Listen, I can say that I know there are risks, that I'm concerned about autoimmune conditions being on the rise and the possible link to vaccinations or not, etc and not be anti science or even be anti-vaccine. 

I'd rather my kid have diabetes than polio or tetanus so I'll still vaccinate for those but if someone has a history of autoimmune disease I can see maybe not wanting to do hep B while researching things, etc. And not shaming her for doing so. 

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Æthelthryth the Texan said:

It's all risk at the end of the day and people- and I'm not saying I'm not one of them- want a no risk world. Unfortunately, we can't have it. 

 

Omg, yes. At the end of the day, I think this is what people want. It doesn’t exist on this side of heaven.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, SKL said:

According to statistics cited in one of the linked articles, roughly 0.01% of people who get measles die from it, and since measles is more dangerous to older people, the rate may be less for otherwise healthy children between ages 2 and 4.  Couple that with he very low measles incidence we have today, and the risk of a delayed vax child becoming seriously ill or even making another person ill is quite remote.  But when I was given a CDC handout on MMR, it said the incidence of neurological injury (iirc) was 5%. That's 5% of almost all the millions of kids in the USA.  Higher for kids who happen to be more vulnerable than others - and we don't yet know who those kids are.

You are correct that more and clearer information is needed.  I was that mom who was scoffed at when I asked the doctor "can we talk about this?"  That's not the way to do this, as others in the thread have said.

FTR my kids were vaxed at age 2.5 (for MMR).  If they caught measles at age 1 or 2, I assume they would be in the "unvaxed" category which is angering so many people right now.
 

The problem with measles is that it is so highly contagious.  That is why this particular illness is being seen as a problem and an epidemic even at this level. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Æthelthryth the Texan said:

Measles doesn't really care about hygiene, fwiw. And it's one thing to say we shouldn't focus on other countries if we lived in a box, but we don't. International travel be it foot, car, plane, or boat is a real thing. And the immediacy of air travel makes means you can't lump us vs them really. So you don need to be concerned about it as a whole, not a part. It's like saying, "well Ebola only happens in Congo, so we don't need a plan in place for that!" Well, it does till it doesn't. We all saw how enjoyably that played out a couple of years ago, and that is only the tip of the iceberg on what could happen, not to mention they've been worried and working on Ebola since the 70's at least. 

I don't know y'all. Pandemics are pretty intimidating things to behold. It's not like pandemics are a thing of the past that will never happen again because we're First World or something. Microbes don't really care. Maybe I smoked too much of the Public Health woo, but the disease experts are alarmed and that's enough for me. I do wish the best to everyone- vaxxer or not, but I don't think this is just a theoretical topic with no real consequence. 

I know I spent too much time with the epis in Hawaii. It seriously freaked me out that two of the measles kids were on a Hawai vacay. They were quarantined on arrival tho.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, StaceyinLA said:

 

Not a tough call for healthy kids? Tell that to a mom whose perfectly normal 2 month old is injected with what, 7-8 vaccines at ONCE and then dies from “SIDS” within 24-36 hours. You can be rude and hateful about people making their own choices all you want, but these reactions can and DO happen, and a parent should be able to decide how and if they want to dump that load of toxins in their 10 lb baby or not.

 

Do you call all medications a "load of toxins" or do you reserve that only for vaccines? Just wondering about consistency.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know if this is a location problem or what, but some of you need new doctors.  Our pediatricians (and we've seen more than one) have all discussed the different vaccines individually and have assessed risk for my particular children.  They have not pushed vaccines blindly.  But they have also done their job as doctors and have told me what they felt would really benefit my children at different times in their lives.  We waited on some of the Hepatitis vaccines, though we still got them - and made sure that we had them before we went overseas because the risk for Hep A esp. was greater. 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, goldberry said:

 

Do you call all medications a "load of toxins" or do you reserve that only for vaccines? Just wondering about consistency.

Yeah, I'm personally really sick of the "toxin" terminology in general. The phrase "the dose makes the poison" needs to come back into common usage. 

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, gardenmom5 said:

 

I see naturopaths - they vaccinate

they give an option to do so on a reduced schedule, but they understand the importance of vaccination.

I find lumping them in with antivaxxer's uneducated.

 

 I was talking about specific people with specific worldviews, not lumping anyone.  I do suspect there are plenty of examples of other people who are similar to those poles.  

But as it happens, naturopathic doctors are less likely to be pro-vaccination, in Canada (which as it happens already has a somewhat less aggressive vaccine schedule than the US)  only 13%of naturopaths recommend all the standard vaccines, and only half of their patients vaccinate their kids.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We really need our lawmakers and medical community educated on federal policy. Unfortunately, because the pharmaceutical industry pays over 70% of media ad revenue, most of us are sold the public health message that “vaccines are safe and effective” without getting the facts. Instead, the pharmaceutical industry and the media are resorting to fear tactics that include using the label “anti-vax” to slander anyone who questions the liability-free 72 recommended vaccine dose schedule that has never been cumulatively safety studied and has not been individually tested using the same gold standard for drug testing required for mos other pharmaceuticals. The liability-free vaccines on the childhood schedule have never undergone inert placebo testing and lack credible safety testing. Once these facts are understood, parents can make informed decisions about their risks vs benefits. 

As parents, we have every right to question and thoroughly examine the risks of medical interventions for our children. Vaccines, like every other pharmaceutical, come with a list of known adverse reactions, some of which can cause debilitating life-altering injury, including death, in otherwise healthy children. If the goal is to protect our children’s health, we have to acknowledge that 43% of our children now suffer from at least 1 of 20 chronic illnesses, including Type 1 diabetes, juvenile arthritis, asthma, anaphylactic food allergies, seizure disorders, and other serious neurodevelopmental and autoimmune disorders listed as known vaccine adverse reactions. Our children are sicker than ever and are the first generation that is not expected to live as long as their parents, and we give more vaccine doses than ever before in history.

Since the federal government removed financial liability from the pharmaceutical companies for vaccine injury under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act in 1986 and since then the recommended vaccine schedule has quadrupled, ALL parents need to be aware of federal policy. 

If you look at the federal vaccine injury table, both pertussis and measles vaccines cause what they describe as encephalopathy. If you look on the table at the symptoms of encephalopathy, it’s loss of eye contact, often seizures, which 30% of kids with autism have, it’s not being able to respond to anything except for a loud shout, it’s not being able to recognize people. It’s just the description of an autism progression.

 

The US government has paid more than a BILLION dollars for this specific brain injury and the federal vaccine court stated that: “Vaccine induced encephalopathy can progress into autism, and seizures, and autism-like symptoms.”

Every parent must receive full informed consent. 

Edited by briansmama
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Jean in Newcastle said:

I don't know if this is a location problem or what, but some of you need new doctors.  Our pediatricians (and we've seen more than one) have all discussed the different vaccines individually and have assessed risk for my particular children.  They have not pushed vaccines blindly.  But they have also done their job as doctors and have told me what they felt would really benefit my children at different times in their lives.  We waited on some of the Hepatitis vaccines, though we still got them - and made sure that we had them before we went overseas because the risk for Hep A esp. was greater. 

Ours too. 

Im not even a delayed vaccinator. I’m just like “why we gotta jab my poor baby five times in one day? Can we come back in a few weeks?”

 

but we’ve had the same doctor for ever and he sees all of us and they’re pretty confident we’ll be back when we say we will.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Frances said:

And schools are actually checking state record for compliance? It’s  hard to imagine my son’s college went back and checked with three different states to see if his vaccination records were actually true. Especially considering that the day he submitted the form, his registration hold was cleared.

yes they are.

in 2017, I had a mixup about dudeling's vaccination status and he missed a dose.  I got a notice from the school that he missed a dose, unless I could prove he'd had it. (a "parent" shot booklet record doesn't count.)  I went to his current dr, and a previous one trying to get everything.  then I learned the state has a single database that has all shots from each provider who gave him one.   I was back and forth with the school nurse.  it was made clear - he had to have the shot, or they'd be refusing him to attend school until he received it.  the ONLY record they recognize, is an official record/print out from the provider who administered the vaccine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, briansmama said:

We really need our lawmakers and medical community educated on federal policy. Unfortunately, because the pharmaceutical industry pays over 70% of media ad revenue, most of us are sold the public health message that “vaccines are safe and effective” without getting the facts. Instead, the pharmaceutical industry and the media are resorting to fear tactics that include using the label “anti-vax” to slander anyone who questions the liability-free 72 recommended vaccine dose schedule that has never been cumulatively safety studied and has not been individually tested using the same gold standard for drug testing required by other drugs. The liability-free vaccines on the childhood schedule have never undergone inert placebo testing and lack credible safety testing. Once these facts are understood, parents can make informed decisions about their risks vs benefits. 

As parents, we have every right to question and thoroughly examine the risks of medical interventions for our children. Vaccines, like every other pharmaceutical, come with a list of known adverse reactions, some of which can cause debilitating life-altering injury, including death, in otherwise healthy children. If the goal is to protect our children’s health, we have to acknowledge that 43% of our children now suffer from at least 1 of 20 chronic illnesses, including Type 1 diabetes, juvenile arthritis, asthma, anaphylactic food allergies, seizure disorders, and other serious neurodevelopmental and autoimmune disorders listed as known vaccine adverse reactions. 

Since the federal government removed financial liability from the pharmaceutical companies for vaccine injury under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act in 1986 and since then the recommended vaccine schedule has quadrupled, ALL parents need to be aware of federal policy. 

If you look at the federal vaccine injury table, both pertussis and measles vaccines cause what they describe as encephalopathy. If you look on the table at the symptoms of encephalopathy, it’s loss of eye contact, often seizures, which 30% of kids with autism have, it’s not being able to respond to anything except for a loud shout, it’s not being able to recognize people. It’s just the description of an autism progression.

 

The US government has paid more than a BILLION dollars for this specific brain injury and the federal vaccine court stated that: “Vaccine induced encephalopathy can progress into autism, and seizures, and autism-like symptoms.

Every parent must receive full informed consent. 

And yet my child (and many more with ASD) showed signs of autism at birth, long before any vaccines. 

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Bluegoat said:

 

 I was talking about specific people with specific worldviews, not lumping anyone.  I do suspect there are plenty of examples of other people who are similar to those poles.  

But as it happens, naturopathic doctors are less likely to be pro-vaccination, in Canada (which as it happens already has a somewhat less aggressive vaccine schedule than the US)  only 13%of naturopaths recommend all the standard vaccines, and only half of their patients vaccinate their kids.

I'm in the US - with the "more aggressive vaccine schedule."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Æthelthryth the Texan said:

That's an interesting question. It does seem to be playing out that way on many scientific fronts, as well as live in general, doesn't it? 

I also think that Americans just have some really inconsistent views in general on medicine. Maybe Canadians and Europeans do too- I don't know, I haven't seen the data like I have here. But Americans like pills. A lot. That's why its a trillion dollar industry, not even accounting for illegal drugs. There is all this disconnect- one one hand there is this pull towards non-traditional medicine, on the other hand, people are taking more prescribed medications than ever and they aren't questioning the effects. 

When I worked, it never ceased to amaze me how much overlap there was in the groups who don't vaccinate, but whose children have prescriptions for psychotropic drugs. It's a pretty crazy Venn diagram type of scenario when you look at it. You have a substantial group of public school attending children (and I clarify that because good luck getting vaccine numbers on homeschoolers, or even numbers on homeschoolers and private schoolers US wide, much less have a significant amount of them to have their own category on a Pharma study) who are not vaccinated- you also have a significant number of US public school children who are on psychotropic medications at some point, and there is cross over in between those groups. And I guarantee you, there is a lot more safety data on MMR for instance,  than there is on the effects of some of those drug psychotropic drugs on developing brains. And I do get that maybe children with those issues are also parents who would be less likely to trust a vaccine and have more case to worry- but then you would think, logically, that they would be equally skeptical of the effects of the psychotropic drug and might put that off too. But they typically/statistically don't. And that's not a judgement, but an observation of a fact. So in that light, I've always been curious about what drugs people question over others. It's very inconsistent, what people hold to as a general rule on these things- at least the study data would have it seem as such, when people are opposed to one, but not the other. It's the rarer bird, and maybe for the better, who is anti-everything. 

 

I think that for whatever reason, people conceptualise vaccination very differently than other drugs.  There was a really interesting book a few years ago, called On Immunity, that talked about this (among other things.)  I's well worth a read.

What I find interesting is that I see a lot of people who are fans of homeopathy but anti-vaccine.  Which is so odd, because they are really based on very similar ideas - it's just that with homeopathy, thee turned out to be no mechanism, whereas with immunity, there is.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jean in Newcastle said:

And yet my child (and many more with ASD) showed signs of autism at birth, long before any vaccines. 

dudeling sure did.  in the neonatal period  (he was readmitted to the hospital for a week, at three days old)…  the perinatologist  was expressing concerns.

I was reading an article by the head of the Harvard autism clinic.  she went back and asked very specific questions about what the parents saw and at what ages.  never ever mentioning anything about autism.  every. single. one. - showed autism traits before they received the vaccines.

one thing that isn't out there as much as I'd wish - is that a high bili has been linked to asd (enough that it is a screening question for control groups for autism studies. if the infant had a high bili - they're not allowed in the control group.).  his was 22 and climbing at 69 hours when he was readmitted.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Æthelthryth the Texan said:

A similar comparison would be people who won't take prescription meds of any type, and only believe in natural healing, but will take a boatload of unregulated herbal supplements every day. I don't quite get that cross-over group either, and it's not like supplements not being regulated is a new thing. That happened back when Clinton was president, so people have literally had decades to discover that fact. I do get why people have skepticism in areas- I have some myself- but it doesn't make a lot of the behaviors of people any less logical. I guess that's a whole other thread though, because humans as a whole are pretty illogical in general I guess, no matter how hard we try to think we're not. 

There are some who don't trust government regulation because in general, they distrust government. For that segment of the population regulation is either meaningless or an indication of government overreach or intent to harm.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, gardenmom5 said:

dudeling sure did.  in the neonatal period  (he was readmitted to the hospital for a week, at three days old)…  the perinatologist  was expressing concerns.

I was reading an article by the head of the Harvard autism clinic.  she went back and asked very specific questions about what the parents saw and at what ages.  never ever mentioning anything about autism.  every. single. one. - showed autism traits before they received the vaccines.

one thing that isn't out there as much as I'd wish - is that a high bili has been linked to asd (enough that it is a screening question for control groups for autism studies. if the infant had a high bili - they're not allowed in the control group.).  his was 22 and climbing at 69 hours when he was readmitted.

The vast majority of babies receive Hep B on the first day of life. Most people have no idea what their baby would have been like if he or she was completely unvaccinated and for the babies at risk of vaccine injury, that one vaccine may be enough. In light of recent research about the neurological effects of the Hep B vaccine, we really need to reconsider the  wisdom of giving this on the first day of life. 

Also, babies get several shots at 2 months of age. My babies are just barely interacting and showing signs of any personality at all by that point. Not to mention mom is just barely coming out of their postpartum fog. Was the article specifically talking about babies who got zero vaccines in the first year of life or more? Because if you follow the CDC's schedule, your baby had only a few hours of life he was considered "unvaccinated." And that doesn't even include the vaccines that are now being recommended to pregnant women and their effect on the developing baby. 

Also, most babies also get a vitamin k shot which increases the risk of jaundice. (One of the versions of vitamin k contains benzyl alcohol and we know what alcohol can do to a liver- hence the jaundice) There is even a black box warning in the package insert because it can cause cardiac arrest. 

 

Edited by DesertBlossom
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DesertBlossom said:

I said I wasn't coming back to this thread, but ugh.

As for the current CDC schedule being a good thing-- I'd like to see studies that show that kids who follow the CDC's schedule are healthier. They've added new vaccines to the schedule under the assumption that our babies' bodies will handle it, but meanwhile our kids are sicker than ever. Nearly half of kids today suffer from a chronic illness. 

 

What do you mean when you say kids today are "sicker than ever." Do you have any references? I'd like to understand the parameters of the claim.

Also, correlation is not causation. One cannot assume changes in a vaccination schedule have led to changes in the overall health of children or the prevalence of chronic illness, that would be irresponsible.

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Jean in Newcastle said:

And yet my child (and many more with ASD) showed signs of autism at birth, long before any vaccines. 

As you know, autism is a behavioral diagnosis. Vaccine-induced encephalopathy can cause the symptoms listed in the federal vaccine injury table: loss of eye contact, seizures, not being able to respond to anything other than a loud shout, not being able to recognize people. The federal court states that “Vaccine induced encephalopathy can progress into autism and seizures and autism-like symptoms.” The federal court has paid out over a billion dollars for this specific brain injury. 

World renowned Johns Hopkins-trained pediatric neurologist Dr. Andrew Zimmerman was a pro-Vaccine medical expert used by the federal government to debunk the vaccine-autism link until he discovered vaccine-induced regressive autism in a colleague’s previously healthy daughter. He is under oath in a recorded deposition stating that vaccines can cause autism and that his medical colleagues (neurologists) understand that vaccines can cause regressive autism.

This scientific fact does not prove that vaccines are the only cause of an autism progression or neurodevelopmental disorder, just as vaccines are not the only cause of autoimmune and neurological disorders. 

We must understand vaccine injury in order to correctly identify and report it. Unfortunately, our medical community isn’t being educated on federal policy. This leaves many children suffering from brain inflammation undiagnosed and untreated for years or for life. 

Until this changes, and until our medical community and parents are fully aware of the risks of an untested unsafe 72 dose vaccine schedule, we can expect to see the rate of chronically ill children continue to skyrocket. 

As for the measles discussion, the CDC quietly added the following contraindication to who should NOT get the MMR vaccine: 

  • Has a history of seizures, or has a parent, brother, or sister with a history of seizures.
  • Has a parent, brother, or sister with a history of immune system problems. 

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/vis/vis-statements/mmrv.html

Again, instead of labeling parents “anti-vaxxers,” we must acknowledge that if 43% of our children are now diagnosed with AT LEAST 1 of 20 chronic illnesses, including autoimmune and neuroimmune disorders, MANY of our children should NOT get the MMR vaccine. 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

my understanding is that in an area that’s   few hours drive from us where  they have had measles outbreak problems, the source was people traveling from other countries.

 I understand the distress about vaccines pro and con—but it seems to me that, at least locally to where I live, the main risk is travelers, foreign exchange students, international college students, and so on.

And that doesn’t even seem to be being addressed or discussed.  

Not PC I guess.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Bluegoat said:

 

Yes?  I'm not sure what you are getting at?

you're the one claiming that in Canada (I assume where you live) only 13% of naturopaths support vaccination- and you followed that with "but Canada is less aggressive with vaccine schedules than the US.

My experience with naturopaths -   I take dudeling to one, and I see one.  I've gotten far more help for him than my western med ped I had been going to for twenty five years - has been they support vaccination.  but I'm dealing with US naturopaths,  - not in Canada.

11 minutes ago, DesertBlossom said:

The vast majority of babies receive Hep B on the first day of life. Most people have no idea what their baby would have been like if he or she was completely unvaccinated and for the babies at risk of vaccine injury, that one vaccine may be enough. In light of recent research about the neurological effects of the Hep B vaccine, we really need to reconsider the  wisdom of giving this on the first day of life. 

Also, babies get several shots at 2 months of age. My babies are just barely interacting and showing signs of any personality at all by that point. Not to mention mom is just barely coming out of their postpartum fog. 

Also, most babies also get a vitamin k shot which increases the risk of jaundice. (One of the versions of vitamin k contains benzyl alcohol and we know what alcohol can do to a liver- hence the jaundice) There is even a black box warning in the package insert because it can cause cardiac arrest. 

 

My babies were around before hep b was ever available.  they were doing studies - and banned if they had a high bili - before hep b was ever available.  and hospitals aren't allowed to give "routine shots" of any kind without the parents knowledge or consent.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, TechWife said:

What do you mean when you say kids today are "sicker than ever." Do you have any references? I'd like to understand the parameters of the claim.

Also, correlation is not causation. One cannot assume changes in a vaccination schedule have led to changes in the overall health of children or the prevalence of chronic illness, that would be irresponsible.

 

A quick Google search will show you that the rate of nearly all autoimmune diseases have risen in recent years. That's not even disputed information. 

Just to put things in perspective- more people die each year of asthma related causes than were dying of measles before the introduction of the vaccine. And while asthma isn't contagious, the rise in asthma should be concerning to everyone. But instead it's not really considered a big deal. 

  • Like 2
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Æthelthryth the Texan said:

My guess is that’s going to vary by funding. That’s a pretty time intensive endeavor and most schools don’t have extra resources. A huge number of states don’t make that data easily available either so I am going to doubt your average school does. Your more well off areas might though? 

With the advent of Electronic Medical Records (EMR), it will become cheaper & easier for everyone to access the information. I envision a file that the MD office would upload to the county or state school system periodically that shows what immunizations have been given and to whom. The other alternative would be for the school to access medical records individually, which I would be totally against.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, DesertBlossom said:

The vast majority of babies receive Hep B on the first day of life. Most people have no idea what their baby would have been like if he or she was completely unvaccinated and for the babies at risk of vaccine injury, that one vaccine may be enough. In light of recent research about the neurological effects of the Hep B vaccine, we really need to reconsider the  wisdom of giving this on the first day of life. 

Also, babies get several shots at 2 months of age. My babies are just barely interacting and showing signs of any personality at all by that point. Not to mention mom is just barely coming out of their postpartum fog. Was the article specifically talking about babies who got zero vaccines in the first year of life or more? Because if you follow the CDC's schedule, your baby had only a few hours of life he was considered "unvaccinated." And that doesn't even include the vaccines that are now being recommended to pregnant women and their effect on the developing baby. 

Also, most babies also get a vitamin k shot which increases the risk of jaundice. (One of the versions of vitamin k contains benzyl alcohol and we know what alcohol can do to a liver- hence the jaundice) There is even a black box warning in the package insert because it can cause cardiac arrest. 

 

My son, with ASD, showed indications of sensory issues immediately upon delivery. As in, we could not put him down or he would scream. Not cry, scream. He needed to feel sensory input - we held him for three straight days, nearly 24/7. We swaddled him when he was sleeping until he was nearly one year old.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Pen said:

my understanding is that in an area that’s   few hours drive from us where  they have had measles outbreak problems, the source was people traveling from other countries.

 I understand the distress about vaccines pro and con—but it seems to me that, at least locally to where I live, the main risk is travelers, foreign exchange students, international college students, and so on.

And that doesn’t even seem to be being addressed or discussed.  

Not PC I guess.

 

No, it's not about being PC.  As long as the population is vaccinated to the necessary level - about 95% for measles, those few carriers, and the few who cannot be vaccinated here, aren't really much of an issue.  Chances are, the odd carrier from abroad won't come into contact with the few here who cannot be vaccinated, or those who are but it was ineffective.  

And along with that, it will always be impossible to ensure that there will be no carriers coming in from elsewhere - even if they were actually all vaccinated themselves, it would not be a sure thing.

But if you have those people coming into a population where there are a lot of unvaccinated people, you get an outbreak, and there are all kinds of people potentially coming into contact with the vulnerable. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, briansmama said:

we must acknowledge that if 43% of our children are now diagnosed with AT LEAST 1 of 20 chronic illnesses, including autoimmune and neuroimmune disorders,

Proof, please? As in a journal article detailing the results of a peer reviewed study?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote from kxl.com article Measles outbreak now 47 in Clark County

I don't know if anyone else has already linked this but the general age breakdown is

The breakdown:

  • Age
    • 1 to 10 years: 34 cases
    • 11 to 18 years: 12 cases
    • 19 to 29 years: one case
  • Immunization status
    • Unimmunized: 41 cases
    • Unverified: five cases
    • 1 MMR vaccine: one case
  • Hospitalization: one case (none currently)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Pen said:

my understanding is that in an area that’s   few hours drive from us where  they have had measles outbreak problems, the source was people traveling from other countries.

 I understand the distress about vaccines pro and con—but it seems to me that, at least locally to where I live, the main risk is travelers, foreign exchange students, international college students, and so on.

And that doesn’t even seem to be being addressed or discussed.  

Not PC I guess.

The risk is people not getting vaccinated. My husband travels internationally. He is responsible, had his blood tested several years ago and brought all of his immunizations up to date. That is what keeps him safe when he is traveling to other countries and what keeps him safe (all of us safe) when people from other countries travel here. If you are immunized against measles, you won't get the measles (ok, there is probably a tiny number of people for which the vaccine doesn't work).

Foreign exchange students and international college students have to get immunized according to the schedule required by their educational institution.

I am starting to think that in general, people really don't know how immunizations work & that we haven't done enough talking about herd immunity. To me this is old news, but I guess to some people, it's not.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, gardenmom5 said:

you're the one claiming that in Canada (I assume where you live) only 13% of naturopaths support vaccination- and you followed that with "but Canada is less aggressive with vaccine schedules than the US.

My experience with naturopaths -   I take dudeling to one, and I see one.  I've gotten far more help for him than my western med ped I had been going to for twenty five years - has been they support vaccination.  but I'm dealing with US naturopaths,  - not in Canada.

My babies were around before hep b was ever available.  they were doing studies - and banned if they had a high bili - before hep b was ever available.  and hospitals aren't allowed to give "routine shots" of any kind without the parents knowledge or consent.

 

My thinking was that if anything, since it is a less aggressive schedule - we don't vaccinate newborns - naturopaths and others would be less likely to object.  Not more likely.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Æthelthryth the Texan said:

Interesting side note- In Texas you can opt out of the State Registry. Or you could when my kids last were vaxxed.

HIPPA is also causing some fits on the sharing and transmitting of any EMR, so although the plan is good in theory to reduce medical errors and needless things, my guess is I'll be long dead before they have a reliable vaccine database of any sort that is national in scope. 

The intersection of HIPPA and EMR's will become a specialized field of law rather quickly, I think, if it hasn't already. There is already so much going on that people in healthcare and patients weren't prepared for - just using software introduces another entity into the equation and there have been quite a few discussions about who owns the medical records (right now the provider owns it), who can access it and what can be done with the information, can other entities make money off of it, etc.. Data mining is a real concern, as is patient access to information and the patient's ability to address incorrect information within that record. But, I digress from the main discussion. Sorry!

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, StaceyinLA said:

 

I don’t think that’s amazing - I think it’s awful the amount of toxins that are injected into tiny babies. I also think if we look at the rates of other diseases, like the ridiculous amounts of autoimmune disease there is today, we can’t pretend these attacks on their immune systems are risk-free.

So maybe your kid doesn’t catch a vaccine preventable illness, but instead lives a life with diabetes (and its own risks), or an autoimmune disease that affects them daily for their entire lives. How do we really compare the benefit of one over the other?

I don't considered medicine at non-toxic doses to be toxins and I haven't seen any reputable studies or research indicating the things you list are caused by vaccines. I see emotionally loaded language like "toxins" and "tiny babies" thrown around an awful lot though, and as compelling as it is (because I do not enjoy watching my babies get shots, believe it or not) I don't find it scientifically compelling or based in research. Chemicals and toxins are in everything we eat, drink, and come into contact with everyday. Tiny babies have their immune systems bombarded by germs in the environment far more than the number of vaccines they are given even in the most aggressive of schedules. 

So, yes, given the world history of infant/child mortality, I would prefer to hedge my bets against vaccine preventable diseases. This is based on all the science I have available to me that I'm able to understand as well as the emotional desire to not ever watch my tiny baby suffer from, for example, whooping cough because I was scared of "toxins".

  • Like 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ktgrok said:

Well, my issue is that with the pushback now (and this is in maybe the last 3 years, mores in the last year) forcing parents to choose fully compliant with CDC schedule or no care at all, that we will have LESS vaccination in the population, not more. AND those kids are now without proper regular care, so if they do get sick with a vaccine preventable illness it may be not be diagnosed at all, or if it is later than otherwise, which means MORe spreading of illness. 

A lot of the pushback by the way seems to be caused, at least here, but the switch from small private practices to large corporate practices. The doctors lose the ability to tailor their treatment to the individual patient even if they want to. Their hands are tied. Here, dozens of pediatric practices are owned by only 3 parent companies - two are hospitals and one is just a giant group that consists of everything from pediatricians to obstetricians to dermatologists to family practice etc etc. So HUGE company. I am have some issues with my son's pediatric clinic, mainly that they don't have separate sick and well waiting areas, play stupid christian music as their hold music, and if you see the doctor rather than the ARNP you wait forever, but I am VERY grateful that the owner/doctor refuses to sell his practice to the local hospital group that keeps trying to buy it. He is constantly being pressured to sell but his father was a pediatrician so he grew up seeing old fashioned, personalized care and won't do anything different for his patients. (that and he is also probably a bit too egotistical to deal with not being his own boss, lol). 

I don't want a board at a corporation determining micromanaging my kid's care or telling my doctor what they can and can't do for their patients. 

(This are the same reasons I won't go to a corporation based veterinary clinic actually - partly related to vaccine issues in fact - I worked at one and saw the issues from the inside). 

 

Things may have changed since my kids were small, but I recall being told that the reason I couldn't spread my kids' vaccines out was convenience--specifically the medical practice's,  I'd say. I was not happy with the number of shots being given at a time because I had a history of allergies and autoimmune disease. When I questioned it, nobody bothered to explain any actual medical reason for it. No "we give it at this age because of the risk of exposure is greater" or whatever. Nope. I was told it was done because parents won't come back for the next shot. Excuse me? I was an insecure new mom and felt intimidated because the threat of not being kept as patients was there, so I did what I was told. (I also had no reason to think a different doctor would handle things differently because "we follow the CDC schedule.") But I would have happily come back as often as needed to get the shots done in a reasonable amount of time. Trust... real information... and patient-centered medicine could go a long way toward helping to eliminate at least some of the reluctance parents have.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Stacia said:

Russian bots are also adding to the discord and divisiveness over vaccines:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45294192

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6137759/

With regards to the first article sited, I saw the anti-vax fake Russian site of directory of Vaccine injured children. That was on facebook.  I have two friends on facebook who are anti-vax.  One is also anti-pharmaceuticals too, sells essential oils,  and also posts about chem-trails, etc.  I am also friendly with her son who is my son's friend.  He thinks his mom is nuts about these things.  The other is a big user of regular medical treatments but also anti-vax.  In both cases, I think the women are looking to blame issues on vaccines that have nothing to do with the vaccines.

I no longer tutor children or teach Sunday School because of my immune suppression drugs.  It has drastically reduced how many infections I have. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can see why people wonder about autoimmune stuff.  We know that there are probably issues with modern, first world lifestyles that are in play, but it is so hard to know why - and it could be a lot of things together.  

The new stuff about leukaemia, for example, is very interesting, and I've seen people ask if it could be related to people not getting certain illnesses because of vaccination.  I don't know that that seems the most likely explanation to me - I can at least think of many other possibilities, but it is something that does occur to people.

For me, my base attitude to medical intervention of all kinds is that when you can, i's best to let the body do its work to protect itself, because you never really know for sure what the effects are of intervening - maybe its easy to see direct effects, but indirect ones, or the effects of groups of things taken together, well - who knows.  So I like to see a clear advantage to something serious.  My dd who has asthma gets one always, I don't alway have the other kids get one.  I did this year, since it seemed to be affecting young kids in particular.

I would never se rotavirus or flu or chicken pox as the same thing as measles or pertussis or tetanus.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...