Vaccinations-has anyone declined any?

[LtlFirecracker]

Oh boy,

I was wondering if this topic would every come up. This is becoming a bigger and bigger issue, and more common as the years go by. I could talk forever on the subject, but honestly, I am not sure it is worth my time.

I will say this, the link to autism and immunizations has not been proven by several well done studies. Several authors of the original study have revoked their results. We don''t know the cause of Autism, but as Neatfreak alluded to, most kids are born with autism. It is just the developmental milestones that autistic kids don''t achieve don''t really come until the second year of life (about the same time the immunizations are given).

There are less proteins in the immunizations today then the few immunizations we got as children. There is no evidence that spreading out the immunizations has any benefit to the child. However, if that is the only way a parent will do immunizations, than most doctors will do it.

 

[iluvcarats]

Date: 4/6/2009 2:46:56 PM
Author: neatfreak

Date: 4/6/2009 2:05:16 PM

Author: mela lu

Date: 4/6/2009 1:50:36 PM


Author: iluvcarats


Last year when my daughter was 9 I declined to give her Gardasil for two reasons.



1. It is new, and I wanted to research it first.



2. She was 9, and at an age where she wanted to know what her shots were for, and she wasn't emotionally ready to comprehend STDs.



I will probably give it to her, but not for a few more years. There have been some reports of bad reactions to it, and I want to wait a little longer because of that too.

This is one vaccination I'm not 100% sold on either. I have time before my kid(s) enter this phase of their lives, but this is a good example of one I *may* decline.



In your case iluvcarats, I see your point. It is SO new - that scares me a little. I'm in healthcare marketing, so I tend to be very very skeptical of the way things are marketed - and I tend to do my own research a lot before buying into any Pharmaceutical offering.



That said, I'm still not sure about this topic in general. I'm still in my own exploratory phase.

Just to be clear there is a BIG difference between Gardasil and the other vacs we are talking about. All the other ones are REQUIRED to attend school in many places and thus are routine vaccines (most places have waivers for parents who say no) whereas Gardasil is NOT REQUIRED. It's a choice and even the CDC is not recommending it be made mandatory.


So while you may be offered it, it isn't seen as the same routine vaccines every kid gets unless you object. You have to select it.

I was just sharing that I turned it down, and why.
But FWIW, I didn't seek it out, it was offered.

 

[neatfreak]

Date: 4/6/2009 2:55:44 PM
Author: iluvcarats

Date: 4/6/2009 2:46:56 PM

Author: neatfreak

Date: 4/6/2009 2:05:16 PM


Author: mela lu

Date: 4/6/2009 1:50:36 PM



Author: iluvcarats



Last year when my daughter was 9 I declined to give her Gardasil for two reasons.




1. It is new, and I wanted to research it first.




2. She was 9, and at an age where she wanted to know what her shots were for, and she wasn''t emotionally ready to comprehend STDs.




I will probably give it to her, but not for a few more years. There have been some reports of bad reactions to it, and I want to wait a little longer because of that too.

This is one vaccination I''m not 100% sold on either. I have time before my kid(s) enter this phase of their lives, but this is a good example of one I *may* decline.




In your case iluvcarats, I see your point. It is SO new - that scares me a little. I''m in healthcare marketing, so I tend to be very very skeptical of the way things are marketed - and I tend to do my own research a lot before buying into any Pharmaceutical offering.




That said, I''m still not sure about this topic in general. I''m still in my own exploratory phase.

Just to be clear there is a BIG difference between Gardasil and the other vacs we are talking about. All the other ones are REQUIRED to attend school in many places and thus are routine vaccines (most places have waivers for parents who say no) whereas Gardasil is NOT REQUIRED. It''s a choice and even the CDC is not recommending it be made mandatory.



So while you may be offered it, it isn''t seen as the same routine vaccines every kid gets unless you object. You have to select it.

I was just sharing that I turned it down, and why.

But FWIW, I didn''t seek it out, it was offered.

Sorry ILC- I didn''t mean to imply that we shouldn''t talk about it here. Just that it''s different because it isn''t yet a routine, mandatory vaccine. Thus, many parents are choosing to skip/delay it and the CDC doesn''t advocate that it should be mandatory. No one is sure if the risks outweigh the benefits on that one for everyone yet.

 

[mela lu]

Date: 4/6/2009 2:55:44 PM
Author: iluvcarats

Date: 4/6/2009 2:46:56 PM
Author: neatfreak

Date: 4/6/2009 2:05:16 PM
Author: mela lu

Date: 4/6/2009 1:50:36 PM
Author: iluvcarats
Last year when my daughter was 9 I declined to give her Gardasil for two reasons.
1. It is new, and I wanted to research it first.
2.She was 9, and at an age where she wanted to know what her shots were for, and she wasn''t emotionally ready to comprehend STDs.
I will probably give it to her, but not for a few more years. There have been some reports of bad reactions to it, and I want to wait a little longer because of that too.

This is one vaccination I''m not 100% sold on either. I have time before my kid(s) enter this phase of their lives, but this is a good example of one I *may* decline.
In your case iluvcarats, I see your point. It is SO new - that scares me a little. I''m in healthcare marketing, so I tend to be very very skeptical of the way things are marketed - and I tend to do my own research a lot before buying into any Pharmaceutical offering.
That said, I''m still not sure about this topic in general. I''m still in my own exploratory phase.

Just to be clear there is a BIG difference between Gardasil and the other vacs we are talking about. All the other ones are REQUIRED to attend school in many places and thus are routine vaccines (most places have waivers for parents who say no) whereas Gardasil is NOT REQUIRED. It''s a choice and even the CDC is not recommending it be made mandatory.
So while you may be offered it, it isn''t seen as the same routine vaccines every kid gets unless you object. You have to select it.

I was just sharing that I turned it down, and why.
But FWIW, I didn''t seek it out, it was offered.

Well, I thank you for sharing iluv, because that''s exactly what this thread is for

. I want to hear what people''s experienced have been, what is mandatory in some places vs. optional.

In Canada, Guardacil is included in the Government funded school immunization program. Nurses come to the school and give it to all the kids. You have to OPT out by not signing the consent form if you don''t want it. So, that is an interesting distinction between the US and Canada. I''m always interested in how we are the same, and how we differ, in terms of healthcare ''norms''.

 

[iluvcarats]

Date: 4/6/2009 3:03:39 PM
Author: neatfreak

Date: 4/6/2009 2:55:44 PM

Author: iluvcarats

Date: 4/6/2009 2:46:56 PM


Author: neatfreak

Date: 4/6/2009 2:05:16 PM



Author: mela lu

Date: 4/6/2009 1:50:36 PM




Author: iluvcarats




Last year when my daughter was 9 I declined to give her Gardasil for two reasons.





1. It is new, and I wanted to research it first.





2. She was 9, and at an age where she wanted to know what her shots were for, and she wasn''t emotionally ready to comprehend STDs.





I will probably give it to her, but not for a few more years. There have been some reports of bad reactions to it, and I want to wait a little longer because of that too.

This is one vaccination I''m not 100% sold on either. I have time before my kid(s) enter this phase of their lives, but this is a good example of one I *may* decline.





In your case iluvcarats, I see your point. It is SO new - that scares me a little. I''m in healthcare marketing, so I tend to be very very skeptical of the way things are marketed - and I tend to do my own research a lot before buying into any Pharmaceutical offering.





That said, I''m still not sure about this topic in general. I''m still in my own exploratory phase.

Just to be clear there is a BIG difference between Gardasil and the other vacs we are talking about. All the other ones are REQUIRED to attend school in many places and thus are routine vaccines (most places have waivers for parents who say no) whereas Gardasil is NOT REQUIRED. It''s a choice and even the CDC is not recommending it be made mandatory.




So while you may be offered it, it isn''t seen as the same routine vaccines every kid gets unless you object. You have to select it.

I was just sharing that I turned it down, and why.


But FWIW, I didn''t seek it out, it was offered.

Sorry ILC- I didn''t mean to imply that we shouldn''t talk about it here. Just that it''s different because it isn''t yet a routine, mandatory vaccine. Thus, many parents are choosing to skip/delay it and the CDC doesn''t advocate that it should be mandatory. No one is sure if the risks outweigh the benefits on that one for everyone yet.

No Worries at all NF, and no apology needed.
I am not sold on it yet either.
As far as I am concerned, the jury is still out.

 

[basil]

We just had a measles outbreak at our pediatric hospital.

People think that the index case came in to the ER, likely a kid from a foreign country with a weird rash. Several other kids have gotten sick now (I think 4 so far) from being in the ER the same night, and one adult. All were either not immunized or hadn''t gotten the complete set.

It''s a deadly disease, people. And since they give it at what, 6 months or a year now (?) there''s a bunch of babies who are not immune and therefore at high risk if exposed to it, because these people wouldn''t get their kid vaccinated.

I don''t get why you would want to spread them out. Babies cry the same getting one jab as getting 5. There''s a reason that the vaccine schedules were designed as they were, based on age/risk/exposure/consequences/etc, so I don''t get why laypeople with no medical training would want to screw with them.

You may not think that getting chickenpox is that big of a deal, but there are long term consequences (i.e. shingles) which can go as far as blinding you later in life.

I don''t get why people wouldn''t get the HPV vaccine either. I''d go get it if I was eligible.

I think neatfreak is right - it''s totally a "trendy" thing to do to not vaccinate your kid these days. I think it''s ridiculous.

 

[VegasAngel]

Date: 4/6/2009 3:10:23 PM
Author: basil
We just had a measles outbreak at our pediatric hospital.

People think that the index case came in to the ER, likely a kid from a foreign country with a weird rash. Several other kids have gotten sick now (I think 4 so far) from being in the ER the same night, and one adult. All were either not immunized or hadn't gotten the complete set.

It's a deadly disease, people. And since they give it at what, 6 months or a year now (?) there's a bunch of babies who are not immune and therefore at high risk if exposed to it, because these people wouldn't get their kid vaccinated.

I don't get why you would want to spread them out. Babies cry the same getting one jab as getting 5. There's a reason that the vaccine schedules were designed as they were, based on age/risk/exposure/consequences/etc, so I don't get why laypeople with no medical training would want to screw with them.

You may not think that getting chickenpox is that big of a deal, but there are long term consequences (i.e. shingles) which can go as far as blinding you later in life.

I don't get why people wouldn't get the HPV vaccine either. I'd go get it if I was eligible.

I think neatfreak is right - it's totally a 'trendy' thing to do to not vaccinate your kid these days. I think it's ridiculous.

Probably because chickenpox is such a common disease that I got through just fine, everyone in my family got through it just fine. Of course there will be people who will have complications but that applies for most medical conditions. I just don't think it is as serious as some other illnesses. Honestly I see that particular vaccine as a money maker. Maybe someone can answer this for me vaccines are stressed as essential for children why don't Dr. push boosters for adults?

 

[iluvcarats]

Date: 4/6/2009 3:07:10 PM
Author: mela lu

Date: 4/6/2009 2:55:44 PM

Author: iluvcarats

Date: 4/6/2009 2:46:56 PM

Author: neatfreak

Date: 4/6/2009 2:05:16 PM

Author: mela lu

Date: 4/6/2009 1:50:36 PM

Author: iluvcarats

Last year when my daughter was 9 I declined to give her Gardasil for two reasons.

1. It is new, and I wanted to research it first.

2.She was 9, and at an age where she wanted to know what her shots were for, and she wasn''t emotionally ready to comprehend STDs.

I will probably give it to her, but not for a few more years. There have been some reports of bad reactions to it, and I want to wait a little longer because of that too.

This is one vaccination I''m not 100% sold on either. I have time before my kid(s) enter this phase of their lives, but this is a good example of one I *may* decline.

In your case iluvcarats, I see your point. It is SO new - that scares me a little. I''m in healthcare marketing, so I tend to be very very skeptical of the way things are marketed - and I tend to do my own research a lot before buying into any Pharmaceutical offering.

That said, I''m still not sure about this topic in general. I''m still in my own exploratory phase.

Just to be clear there is a BIG difference between Gardasil and the other vacs we are talking about. All the other ones are REQUIRED to attend school in many places and thus are routine vaccines (most places have waivers for parents who say no) whereas Gardasil is NOT REQUIRED. It''s a choice and even the CDC is not recommending it be made mandatory.

So while you may be offered it, it isn''t seen as the same routine vaccines every kid gets unless you object. You have to select it.

I was just sharing that I turned it down, and why.

But FWIW, I didn''t seek it out, it was offered.

Well, I thank you for sharing iluv, because that''s exactly what this thread is for

. I want to hear what people''s experienced have been, what is mandatory in some places vs. optional.


In Canada, Guardacil is included in the Government funded school immunization program. Nurses come to the school and give it to all the kids. You have to OPT out by not signing the consent form if you don''t want it. So, that is an interesting distinction between the US and Canada. I''m always interested in how we are the same, and how we differ, in terms of healthcare ''norms''.

When it was presented to me, it seemed mandatory. My Pedi thought I was nuts, but I said I would look into it.
I just felt that it wasn''t necessary to protect her from STD''s at the age of 9. I know that unfortunately there are 9 year olds who are sexually active, but thankfully she isn''t one of them.
I am glad that I didn''t do it because there have been some disturbing reports linked to it.

 

[Italiahaircolor]

It really really terrifies me to think that our new generation of children will not be vaccinated....

I believe that sometimes we can over inoculate children...and that vaccines show to have horrible side effects should be "cleaned up"...but I don''t believe we can live in a world were there is no preventative messure set in place to protect people from each other.

 

[janinegirly]

Basil, tell us what you really think!

Kidding--again, I personally don''t think there''s as much a debate over MMR. Those diseases are making a comeback due to declining of vaccinations-and that is a very real link! You make a good point about little babies being at risk as a result since they are not immunized until after 12 mo''s.

But on the other hand, it''s important to be aware and make educated decisions. Doctors, hospitals and medical professionals aren''t always operating in the public''s interest, and with the increase of business being mixed with the medical industry, we should be questioning and educating ourselves even more. To me, that''s not being trendy. I''m sure we all have had some experience (direct or indirect) with a doctor who screwed up and the patient''s family wished they''d not felt intimadated and asked more questions. Even just staying in a hospital to deliver a baby reveals how much of a "business" it really is...between getting charged $800 for a private room (here in NYC), or the heavy cross marketing (free forumula and diapers!). All I''m saying is it''s not crazy or about getting it..it''s about educating oneself, asking the questions, sharing experiences and then perhaps still going along with what''s recommended, but at least you can feel you knew the reasoning behind what you were doing (or having it done to your child).

 

[basil]

Date: 4/6/2009 3:16:43 PM
Author: VegasAngel

Date: 4/6/2009 3:10:23 PM

Author: basil

We just had a measles outbreak at our pediatric hospital.


People think that the index case came in to the ER, likely a kid from a foreign country with a weird rash. Several other kids have gotten sick now (I think 4 so far) from being in the ER the same night, and one adult. All were either not immunized or hadn''t gotten the complete set.


It''s a deadly disease, people. And since they give it at what, 6 months or a year now (?) there''s a bunch of babies who are not immune and therefore at high risk if exposed to it, because these people wouldn''t get their kid vaccinated.


I don''t get why you would want to spread them out. Babies cry the same getting one jab as getting 5. There''s a reason that the vaccine schedules were designed as they were, based on age/risk/exposure/consequences/etc, so I don''t get why laypeople with no medical training would want to screw with them.


You may not think that getting chickenpox is that big of a deal, but there are long term consequences (i.e. shingles) which can go as far as blinding you later in life.


I don''t get why people wouldn''t get the HPV vaccine either. I''d go get it if I was eligible.


I think neatfreak is right - it''s totally a ''trendy'' thing to do to not vaccinate your kid these days. I think it''s ridiculous.

Probably because chickenpox is such a common disease that I got through just fine, everyone in my family got through it just fine. Of course there will be people who will have complications but that applies for most medical conditions. I just don''t think it is as serious as some other illnesses. Honestly I see that particular vaccine as a money maker. Maybe someone can answer this for me vaccines are stressed as essential in child why don''t Dr. push boosters for adults?

I see people several times a week with shingles in their eye. In their eye! Some of them lose vision. At best it is extremely painful for weeks to months. Just because you haven''t had any of the consequences (yet), doesn''t mean it''s not a good thing to protect your baby from it.

I didn''t get the HIb vaccine either, and I got ear infections, and they never spread through my ear canal to my brain and gave me meningitis as an infant, but that doesn''t mean that that didn''t happen to some kids, and that protecting kids from that isn''t a good idea.

IMO, PCPs should push booster shots for adults too, and age-appropriate vaccines (pneumonia vaccine, etc.).

 

[vespergirl]

Date: 4/6/2009 3:10:23 PM
Author: basil
We just had a measles outbreak at our pediatric hospital.

People think that the index case came in to the ER, likely a kid from a foreign country with a weird rash. Several other kids have gotten sick now (I think 4 so far) from being in the ER the same night, and one adult. All were either not immunized or hadn''t gotten the complete set.

It''s a deadly disease, people. And since they give it at what, 6 months or a year now (?) there''s a bunch of babies who are not immune and therefore at high risk if exposed to it, because these people wouldn''t get their kid vaccinated.

I don''t get why you would want to spread them out. Babies cry the same getting one jab as getting 5. There''s a reason that the vaccine schedules were designed as they were, based on age/risk/exposure/consequences/etc, so I don''t get why laypeople with no medical training would want to screw with them.

You may not think that getting chickenpox is that big of a deal, but there are long term consequences (i.e. shingles) which can go as far as blinding you later in life.

I don''t get why people wouldn''t get the HPV vaccine either. I''d go get it if I was eligible.

I think neatfreak is right - it''s totally a ''trendy'' thing to do to not vaccinate your kid these days. I think it''s ridiculous.

Staggering vaccinations isn''t about babies crying, it''s about tolerance of the vaccines. Back in the 70s and 80s, my brother & I had such severe reactions to our vaccinations after getting several of them on the same day that we both had to be hospitalized. When I told my ped about this with my son, he suggested that we stagger the vaccinations, so that instead of getting 5 or 6 on one day, he would get a few on one day, and a few a couple of weeks later. My son didn''t have adverse reactions when they were staggered, and my pediatrician was the one who suggested it.

 

[basil]

Date: 4/6/2009 3:24:03 PM
Author: janinegirly
Basil, tell us what you really think!

Kidding--again, I personally don''t think there''s as much a debate over MMR. Those diseases are making a comeback due to declining of vaccinations-and that is a very real link! You make a good point about little babies being at risk as a result since they are not immunized until after 12 mo''s.


But on the other hand, it''s important to be aware and make educated decisions. Doctors, hospitals and medical professionals aren''t always operating in the public''s interest, and with the increase of business being mixed with the medical industry, we should be questioning and educating ourselves even more. To me, that''s not being trendy. I''m sure we all have had some experience (direct or indirect) with a doctor who screwed up and the patient''s family wished they''d not felt intimadated and asked more questions. Even just staying in a hospital to deliver a baby reveals how much of a ''business'' it really is...between getting charged $800 for a private room (here in NYC), or the heavy cross marketing (free forumula and diapers!). All I''m saying is it''s not crazy or about getting it..it''s about educating oneself, asking the questions, sharing experiences and then perhaps still going along with what''s recommended, but at least you can feel you knew the reasoning behind what you were doing (or having it done to your child).

Yes, it''s usually a good thing for patients to be educated and to ask appropriate questions so that they feel comfortable with the treatment plan.

But I think immunizations are questioned a lot more frequently than a lot of other medical decisions. I don''t usually hear of people wondering if they should take antibiotics for their pneumonia, if they should get their broken arm fixed, or if they should really get a mammogram or colonoscopy. There are probably people out there who think like that, but it''s not as often as this immunization business.

I do things every day that pose way way more risk to patients than vaccines, so I''m obviously biased. To me, it seems like they are so relatively harmless and so beneficial, why wouldn''t you?

 

[mela lu]

Date: 4/6/2009 3:24:03 PM
Author: janinegirly
Basil, tell us what you really think!

Kidding--again, I personally don''t think there''s as much a debate over MMR. Those diseases are making a comeback due to declining of vaccinations-and that is a very real link! You make a good point about little babies being at risk as a result since they are not immunized until after 12 mo''s.


But on the other hand, it''s important to be aware and make educated decisions. Doctors, hospitals and medical professionals aren''t always operating in the public''s interest, and with the increase of business being mixed with the medical industry, we should be questioning and educating ourselves even more. To me, that''s not being trendy. I''m sure we all have had some experience (direct or indirect) with a doctor who screwed up and the patient''s family wished they''d not felt intimadated and asked more questions. Even just staying in a hospital to deliver a baby reveals how much of a ''business'' it really is...between getting charged $800 for a private room (here in NYC), or the heavy cross marketing (free forumula and diapers!). All I''m saying is it''s not crazy or about getting it..it''s about educating oneself, asking the questions, sharing experiences and then perhaps still going along with what''s recommended, but at least you can feel you knew the reasoning behind what you were doing (or having it done to your child).

Well said Janine. This is exactly what I mean by being skeptical of Pharma offerings.

I just think that saying ''oh my Dr. knows best'', is putting a lot of trust into someone else''s hands.

Again, I''m not saying I''m not going to Vaccinate. I just want to know as much as I can before making all decisions.

That''s what brought me to PS.

I wanted to know EVERYTHING about a diamond before purchasing.

 

[NovemberBride]

Date: 4/6/2009 3:38:53 PM
Author: mela lu

Date: 4/6/2009 3:24:03 PM
Author: janinegirly
Basil, tell us what you really think!

Kidding--again, I personally don''t think there''s as much a debate over MMR. Those diseases are making a comeback due to declining of vaccinations-and that is a very real link! You make a good point about little babies being at risk as a result since they are not immunized until after 12 mo''s.


But on the other hand, it''s important to be aware and make educated decisions. Doctors, hospitals and medical professionals aren''t always operating in the public''s interest, and with the increase of business being mixed with the medical industry, we should be questioning and educating ourselves even more. To me, that''s not being trendy. I''m sure we all have had some experience (direct or indirect) with a doctor who screwed up and the patient''s family wished they''d not felt intimadated and asked more questions. Even just staying in a hospital to deliver a baby reveals how much of a ''business'' it really is...between getting charged $800 for a private room (here in NYC), or the heavy cross marketing (free forumula and diapers!). All I''m saying is it''s not crazy or about getting it..it''s about educating oneself, asking the questions, sharing experiences and then perhaps still going along with what''s recommended, but at least you can feel you knew the reasoning behind what you were doing (or having it done to your child).

Well said Janine. This is exactly what I mean by being skeptical of Pharma offerings.

I just think that saying ''oh my Dr. knows best'', is putting a lot of trust into someone else''s hands.

Again, I''m not saying I''m not going to Vaccinate. I just want to know as much as I can before making all decisions.

That''s what brought me to PS.

I wanted to know EVERYTHING about a diamond before purchasing.

To be fair, big pharma cannot just come out with a new vaccine and start marketing it. It takes years, even decades for a new vaccine (or drug) to come to market. Most people have absolutely no idea of the extremely rigorous studies that a new vaccine or drug is subject to before it ever gets anywher near a consumer. And these are studies performed with the FDA (in the US), not just by big pharma. Yes, big pharma is like any other corporation and is out to make money. But trust me, they have no desire to put out a vaccine or drug that has harmful effects - have you seen the huge jury verdicts that get awarded in these types of cases? And that''s not even counting the millions and millions they spend each year to defend product liability cases even if they don''t ultimately lose the case. It really is in their best interests to throughly vet these vaccines and drugs. That is not to say that everyone shouldn''t do their own research, but I think if everyone really understand the process of bringing the vaccine to market, they would be a lot more comfortable.

 

[basil]

Date: 4/6/2009 3:38:53 PM
Author: mela lu


Well said Janine. This is exactly what I mean by being skeptical of Pharma offerings.


I just think that saying ''oh my Dr. knows best'', is putting a lot of trust into someone else''s hands.


Again, I''m not saying I''m not going to Vaccinate. I just want to know as much as I can before making all decisions.


That''s what brought me to PS.

I wanted to know EVERYTHING about a diamond before purchasing.

Well, I think it''s more like me trying to fix my own car. I can ask people on the internet what "bump bump scrape" means is wrong with it, but they can give me their personal anecdotes and guesses. But the bottome line is that if I take it to a quack unscrupulous mechanic, something bad might happen. And if I take it to someone I trust, and they answer my questions reasonably and honestly, then I''ll take their recommendations over those of the random internet people.

But I see getting vaccines like changing the oil or rotating the tires. I guess someone could argue that those are unneccessary, but most people would be like WTF? But maybe if I changed my oil right before my kid got diagnosed with autism I could start a movement

 

[mela lu]

Date: 4/6/2009 3:52:59 PM
Author: basil

Date: 4/6/2009 3:38:53 PM

Author: mela lu
Well said Janine. This is exactly what I mean by being skeptical of Pharma offerings.
I just think that saying ''oh my Dr. knows best'', is putting a lot of trust into someone else''s hands.
Again, I''m not saying I''m not going to Vaccinate. I just want to know as much as I can before making all decisions.
That''s what brought me to PS.

I wanted to know EVERYTHING about a diamond before purchasing.

Well, I think it''s more like me trying to fix my own car. I can ask people on the internet what ''bump bump scrape'' means is wrong with it, but they can give me their personal anecdotes and guesses. But the bottome line is that if I take it to a quack unscrupulous mechanic, something bad might happen. And if I take it to someone I trust, and they answer my questions reasonably and honestly, then I''ll take their recommendations over those of the random internet people.
But I see getting vaccines like changing the oil or rotating the tires. I guess someone could argue that those are unneccessary, but most people would be like WTF? But maybe if I changed my oil right before my kid got diagnosed with autism I could start a movement

LOL basil. you crack me up

 

[ljmorgan]

I''m having a baby in three weeks so this is something that I have researched a lot and have had a lot of conversations with my husband about. I initially thought that I might delay, spread them out, or refuse certain vaccinations. The more I looked into it, it seemed that anti-vaccine sentiments are just very popular, and for the most part come from completely uncredible sources.

So we''ll be vaccinating on schedule, on time, unless our baby shows signs of vaccine reactions in which case we would spread them out. I think if a child has a tougher time with vaccines (reactions, fevers, etc) then it certainly makes sense to slow them down or spread them out. But the loudest cries about vaccines and autism seem to come from a lot of hysteria and "well it MUST be this" rather than any sort of evidence.

 

[AmberGretchen]

I''d like to thank LtFireCracker and Basil for chiming in - it really helps to have these opinions reinforced by professional medical opinions.

I would also like to make the point that while, as has been correctly noted, Pharma companies are fundamentally designed to make money, the incentives are very strong to produce safe products because of the astronomically high costs of defending liability for products that aren''t safe.

Additionally, medical doctors and other health care professionals spend countless hours studying and training to protect peoples'' health. And I do think that Basil is absolutely right that they are our best resource for a complete perspective on what is best for health. FWIW, I''m about 2 months from finishing my PhD in immunology/infectious diseases and every study and talk and reputable resource I''ve ever come across strongly comes down in favor of the benefits of childhood vaccinations VASTLY outweighing the risks.

 

[janinegirly]

Thanks amber, good points. I kind of wish some of you had been on Larry King! The doctors they had on to defend vaccinations were not very personable, and old, stern and gray looking. Not that I''m getting my "education" from celebrities on Larry King

, but it''s easy to see how the issue became "popularized" with news shows like this.

I agree it''s not in pharmaceutical companies to develop harmful products. But it is in their interest to keep coming out with new and possibly unnecessary ones--while convicing us they are necessary. Not just talking about vaccinations. Had anyone heard of restless leg syndrome before all the advertisements?

 

[TravelingGal]

I do think it''s socially irresponsible not to have your kid fully vaccinated before they start school. I have no issue with delayed or staggered vacs if the situation calls for it. If parents want to go to the doc''s more often to get the vacs 1 or 2 at a time, and aren''t putting it off too much, I personally don''t have an issue with that (and I''m talking about what a previous poster said - getting one or two vacs, then going back a couple of weeks later to get the rest.)

I read about this subject. A LOT. Even before I ever got pregnant because autism is a subject I find interesting. Back in the pregnancy thread I went out of my way to make sure I would not get a flu shot containing thimerosal (it''s law in California anyway that babies and preggos have to have thimersol free shotss). I figure WHY put that stuff in my body when there is an alternative?

Well, when it comes to vacs, I don''t like the alternative. I would not forgive myself if my kid died from something that was easily vaccinated against. I read enough to believe that the pros outweight the cons.

That being said...

It is STILL nervewracking! In my mind I know it is fine, but Amelia got her MMR last week. I just kept monitoring her carefully (I think "paranoid" is probably a better word). I sat there and said, "Look into my eyes, kid! Tell me you''re alright! You''re all there, right???!!?"

And yeah, she''s fine, but my heart beat a little faster when they gave her that MMR shot. Not because I didn''t think she was going to be OK, I did. But because there''s STILL that crazy SLIGHT possibility out there that *MAYBE* Jenny McCarthy might be a playboy bunny who isn''t off her rocker!!

 

[swimmer]

Lindsey, You might have hit the nail on the head there. I can''t imagine the flood of emotions when discovering that a child is autistic. The need to point fingers is understandable and yes, everyone does get vaccines. But that does not make for a causal relationship.

Many school districts have had difficulties with what to do with kids who are not allowed inside the school because of not being vaccinated and yet the law requires that the student receive an education.

I don''t understand the comment earlier about there being no adult vaccinations...don''t all adults regularly get updates/boosters for rabies, tetanus, etc? link I travel a great deal in the developing world so have seen what happens when vaccinations are not possible. But I think these are even necessary when interacting with other humans at Costco.

 

[mela lu]

Date: 4/6/2009 4:20:35 PM
Author: janinegirly
Thanks amber, good points. I kind of wish some of you had been on Larry King! The doctors they had on to defend vaccinations were not very personable, and old, stern and gray looking. Not that I''m getting my ''education'' from celebrities on Larry King

, but it''s easy to see how the issue became ''popularized'' with news shows like this.
I agree it''s not in pharmaceutical companies to develop harmful products. But it is in their interest to keep coming out with new and possibly unnecessary ones--while convicing us they are necessary. Not just talking about vaccinations. Had anyone heard of restless leg syndrome before all the advertisements?

Travelers Diarrhea
IBS
GERD

Right, this is not related to vaccines, but about having a healthy amount of skepticism for Pharma products in general.
***

I''m curious if any of the Doctors on PS, or AmberGretchen (for example) feel that *any* of the vaccines are not 1000% mandatory. I''m not talking about the ones we KNOW to be safe, socially responsible, and considered mandatory by the school boards etc.

I''m wondering, outside of those? For example, Menactra. (protects against the 4 strains of meningococcal menangitis). That''s one that I''m not sure about being necessary!? What do you think?

 

[cara]

Sure there are tons of vaccines that are optional for certain people. Flu shots every year, for example. My husband gets one cause he''s a doctor (high risk of exposure) and old and young people should get them. Husband even hassles me every year to get one even though I''m not in the recommended groups because there is little downside to me getting the shot, and the upside is less chance I get the flu that year. However, they are not recommended for everyone because the flu doesn''t usually kill healthy adults, they need to be redone each year b/c the flu is a rapidly mutating virus, they are not even 100% effective in any given year (b/c the flu is a rapidly mutating virus), there is sometimes a limited supply, and of course it is not a shot that costs pennies (b/c it has to be remade each year b/c the flu is a rapidly mutating virus.)

The TB vaccine is not routinely administered in the US. Also, it is not 100% effective and TB rates are so low that it is only recommended for people at high exposure risk. But I work with a number of people from foreign countries that either were vaccinated (South Korea, Russia) or should have been (India).

Smallpox- not routinely given to anyone anymore!

I turned down the yellow fever shot when I was traveling to Argentina because it was expensive and I wasn''t going within 1000 km of the tropical regions where yellow fever is a concern.

I turned down some of the STD vaccines b/c of cost, and banking on my husband and I continuing to be exclusive partners

.

I talked to my husband about whether or not I should get the HPV vaccine (gardasil) and even separate from my current low-risk sex life he said I was too old.

Mothers of 9 year olds, 12 years olds, etc, that is the age you want to vaccinate for HPV. Because you want the immunity in place before sexual activity. Also, the HPV takes years to cause cancer, so typically the older you are at vaccination, the lower the benefit. I believe current guidelines only call for vaccinating women up to age 27. Also when your daughter is older, she might not come to you to ask for her shots prior to having sex! And if she has waited until she is well out of the house, she might not have health insurance or whatnot. So look at the risk benefit now and talk to a doctor, but if ultimately you are in favor of vaccinating, I don''t think that waiting is necessarily the wisest action.

 

[MichelleCarmen]

Date: 4/6/2009 4:27:18 PM
Author: swimmer


Many school districts have had difficulties with what to do with kids who are not allowed inside the school because of not being vaccinated and yet the law requires that the student receive an education.

In Washington State we''re permitted "philosophical exemptions" from vaccinating. My kids haven''t had any problems with being accepted into the public school system.

 

[basil]

Date: 4/6/2009 4:33:01 PM
Author: mela lu

Travelers Diarrhea

IBS

GERD

Right, this is not related to vaccines, but about having a healthy amount of skepticism for Pharma products in general.

***


I'm curious if any of the Doctors on PS, or AmberGretchen (for example) feel that *any* of the vaccines are not 1000% mandatory. I'm not talking about the ones we KNOW to be safe, socially responsible, and considered mandatory by the school boards etc.


I'm wondering, outside of those? For example, Menactra. (protects against the 4 strains of meningococcal menangitis). That's one that I'm not sure about being necessary!? What do you think?

Well, there are absolutely vaccines that aren't mandatory! I'm not saying everyone should go out and get the smallpox vaccine. There are some vaccines that are recommended for people who are in certain high risk groups - people who travel to endemic areas, people with certain immune deficiencies, sickle cell, etc. As for the meningitis vaccine, I looked up the American Academy of Pediatrics recommendation, and it recommends it for age 11-12, and younger only for those with immune deficiencies (I don't know what the recommendations are in Canada). I think the goal there is to get it to kids before they start college or get into the military, since it's known to become epidemic in close living environments, and though it's rare it can be deadly. I guess if someone really wanted, they could hold off until 18. Or if your kid is going to be a hermit, I wouldn't bother. But since I know my kid is going to be really social and the life of the party

, I'd probably just get it over with at 11 so I wouldn't have to worry about it anymore.

ETA: I agree with you on IBS, but I don't get why you think GERD and Traveler's diarrhea aren't real? Or how traveler's diarrhea makes money for pharm companies? Maybe I'm just out of the loop on that one.

 

[cara]

Date: 4/6/2009 4:33:01 PM
Author: mela lu

Date: 4/6/2009 4:20:35 PM
Author: janinegirly
Thanks amber, good points. I kind of wish some of you had been on Larry King! The doctors they had on to defend vaccinations were not very personable, and old, stern and gray looking. Not that I'm getting my 'education' from celebrities on Larry King

, but it's easy to see how the issue became 'popularized' with news shows like this.

I agree it's not in pharmaceutical companies to develop harmful products. But it is in their interest to keep coming out with new and possibly unnecessary ones--while convicing us they are necessary. Not just talking about vaccinations. Had anyone heard of restless leg syndrome before all the advertisements?

Travelers Diarrhea
IBS
GERD

Right, this is not related to vaccines, but about having a healthy amount of skepticism for Pharma products in general.
***
I'm curious if any of the Doctors on PS, or AmberGretchen (for example) feel that *any* of the vaccines are not 1000% mandatory. I'm not talking about the ones we KNOW to be safe, socially responsible, and considered mandatory by the school boards etc.

I'm wondering, outside of those? For example, Menactra. (protects against the 4 strains of meningococcal menangitis). That's one that I'm not sure about being necessary!? What do you think?

Mela, I'm not a doctor, but my husband and I discussed what he thought of my cousin not vaccinating her son. Since the son lives in an area with a lot of foreign-born people (that might regularly travel to their home countries) and recent immigrants, husband felt that there was a non-negligible but still very small risk of contracting one of the diseases that is usually immunized against. We also live in a high-immigrant area, and there are occasional outbreaks of these diseases that he either sees or hears about. Which disease depends on what immigrants or travelers come in with, with the vaccination rate of the local population playing some role.

But we both felt the while the risk of the kid dying from something was non-zero but really low, the bigger issue was a moral one concerning public health. The only reason that the risk to that kid alone was so low was because he was in a population that was largely vaccinated. So the mother was relying on the herd immunity provided by other parents vaccinating their kids to keep her kid safe. That reduces the effect of herd immunity for those that have a medical reason for not being vaccinated - infants not yet vaccinated or those that are allergic to some vaccine component - or those people that were vaccinated but did not develop full immunity for whatever reason.

So I guess my question for you is - what is your definition of 'need'? Does it include the public health implications of a given vaccine or are you only concerned with the benefits to the individual getting the shot?

 

[swimmer]

Date: 4/6/2009 5:19:15 PM
Author: MC

Date: 4/6/2009 4:27:18 PM

Author: swimmer



Many school districts have had difficulties with what to do with kids who are not allowed inside the school because of not being vaccinated and yet the law requires that the student receive an education.

In Washington State we're permitted 'philosophical exemptions' from vaccinating. My kids haven't had any problems with being accepted into the public school system.

In Massachusetts, families are specifically not allowed "philosophical, personal, or conscientious" exemptions, only "religious or medical" exemptions. Yes, I am wondering now about the difference between conscience and religion in that definition. Yes, legislation/rulings of course vary from state to state. Boston first mandated vaccination for schoolchildren in 1827. I recently had to get a "booster shot" in order to remain enrolled at a private university here. No exemptions were offered.

I don't remember which vaccinations were required for undergrad in order to live in the dorms, but in traveling between Nigeria, Mali, and Togo I had to have my yellow fever, cholera, and perhaps another vaccination? marked on my yellow card (attached to the passport) or one would have been given to me on the spot with a used needle. No thanks. The Cholera jab is so ineffective the Dr. just faked it for me at her suggestion since I wasn't into risking the dirty needle. So some immunizations are not worth it, but man I am happy to not have Polio, Rabies, Meningitis, Tetanus, Hepatitis, or Measles, Mumps, Rubella, etc. If there was a malaria vaccination I would happily get it and have my kids get it as well, its just a dreadful disease.

Hopefully there will someday be a vaccination for HIV. And to address Cara's question, I value the fact that by being vaccinated I will probably not pass along a deadly disease to another person. That is invaluable to me and far outweighs all sorts of risks. Can you imagine being responsible for spreading a disease to someone with a compromised immune system or otherwise contributing to the spread of preventable disease? We give up some freedoms in order to exist in society right?

 

[mela lu]

Date: 4/6/2009 5:21:36 PM
Author: basil

ETA: I agree with you on IBS, but I don''t get why you think GERD and Traveler''s diarrhea aren''t real? Or how traveler''s diarrhea makes money for pharm companies? Maybe I''m just out of the loop on that one.

Traveller''s Diarrhea and GERD are certainly real, I was referring to the way these are advertised and marketed. They say ''talk to your doctor if you are travelling and want to avoid travellers diarrhea" thereby planting the seed of fear in people. There are a lot of instances where the advertising/ marketing try to drive a certain consumer behaviour that may or may not be *necessary*.

 

[mela lu]

Date: 4/6/2009 5:23:56 PM
Author: cara

Mela, I''m not a doctor, but my husband and I discussed what he thought of my cousin not vaccinating her son. Since the son lives in an area with a lot of foreign-born people (that might regularly travel to their home countries) and recent immigrants, husband felt that there was a non-negligible but still very small risk of contracting one of the diseases that is usually immunized against. We also live in a high-immigrant area, and there are occasional outbreaks of these diseases that he either sees or hears about. Which disease depends on what immigrants or travelers come in with, with the vaccination rate of the local population playing some role.

But we both felt the while the risk of the kid dying from something was non-zero but really low, the bigger issue was a moral one concerning public health. The only reason that the risk to that kid alone was so low was because he was in a population that was largely vaccinated. So the mother was relying on the herd immunity provided by other parents vaccinating their kids to keep her kid safe. That reduces the effect of herd immunity for those that have a medical reason for not being vaccinated - infants not yet vaccinated or those that are allergic to some vaccine component - or those people that were vaccinated but did not develop full immunity for whatever reason.

So I guess my question for you is - what is your definition of ''need''? Does it include the public health implications of a given vaccine or are you only concerned with the benefits to the individual getting the shot?

Thanks for your weigh in. I''m really not sure about everything yet. I really need to wrap my head around the whole issue. I will be vaccinating my kids for the basics though

.