[Stormster]

What would the drawback be to waiting until the baby is 18 moths ...contracting the disease obviously but what else? Why do they recommend 12 months?

E is scheduled for his MMR a week from today.

[KatiesEd-dad]

Originally Posted by ProspectiveSingleMom

The reality is that not everyone has to be vaccinated for everyone to benefit ... .

That statement is very false and misleading. Just because a high percentage of children are vaccinated does not mean that the virus does not exist in the wild. You can be vaccinated and still be a carrier. These viruses do not totally disappear. With the amount of international air travel, viruses can spread around the world very quickly. Vaccinations were developed because these diseases were horrible. While everyone is entitled to raise their child their own way, I cannot understand why parents would want to take the risk of their child developing an awful, possibly fatal, disease. This has been highly charged issue in previous threads and I don't expect this one to be any different. As someone who works in healthcare and sees the suffering first hand, I can't imagine why anyone would put there child through that if there was a vaccine available.

[court5505]

Originally Posted by KatiesEd-dad

That statement is very false and misleading. Just because a high percentage of children are vaccinated does not mean that the virus does not exist in the wild. You can be vaccinated and still be a carrier. These viruses do not totally disappear. With the amount of international air travel, viruses can spread around the world very quickly. Vaccinations were developed because these diseases were horrible. While everyone is entitled to raise their child their own way, I cannot understand why parents would want to take the risk of their child developing an awful, possibly fatal, disease. This has been highly charged issue in previous threads and I don't expect this one to be any different. As someone who works in healthcare and sees the suffering first hand, I can't imagine why anyone would put there child through that if there was a vaccine available.

I agree with this. I have a good friend that is a pediatrician. I asked him about the vaccines and he said "If you would see a kid that had one of these diseases that are vaccinated for, you wouldn't think twice about vaccinating your kid." He said it can be absolutely horrifying.

Everyone is entitled to do what they feel is best for their child and I think there will always be a debate about what is the best course of action.

[MamaS]

I have experienced the results of lack of vaccination twice. First, my daughter developed chicken pox a year before the vaccine was approved. Normally, Chicken Pox is just itchy but her body reacted to the virus and she developed Thrompocytopenia. We spent a week in the hospital and two months afterward of weekly blood tests.
Several years later I caught Whooping Cough from one of the unvaccinated children in our school. For five months I was coughing so hard that I would black out. I was unable to drive, and underwent lots of (expensive) tests to make sure I had not torn, ruptured or injured something during the blackouts and subsequent falls.
Failure to vaccinate shows a disregard for the health of others around you.

[Whirled_Peas]

Originally Posted by MamaS

Failure to vaccinate shows a disregard for the health of others around you.

That's a pretty unkind statement. You do not know why I chose to not vaccinate my son. You do not know the research I did and the "experts" I communicated with. You do not know how much my husband and I struggled to make our decision.

There are plenty of smart people that do not think it is healthy to give every child every vaccine ever invented.

If a parent chooses to vaccinate their child, I hope they have done their research--and not just ask your pediatrician. I am an RN. I know how medical people are "educated" about vaccines. Really, there is no brainwork involved in the education. "We say they're safe so that makes them safe."

There is a Congressional fund that will pay out hundreds of thousands of dollars to any family whose child has been killed or injured by vaccines. Over 90 payments have been made for children who died as a result of vaccinations. If vaccines are so safe, why would this fund even exist?

Vaccines have done a lot of good. When my son is older we may selectively vaccinate him. (I worry about polio and possibly tetanus.) We will not vaccinate him for every disease. I do not disregard your family's health. However, I do not want to put my son at risk either. We all have to make our choices. If you feel better having vaccinated your child, then fine. I do not insult you. Please do not insult me.

[Whirled_Peas]

Originally Posted by Stormster

What would the drawback be to waiting until the baby is 18 moths ...contracting the disease obviously but what else? Why do they recommend 12 months?

E is scheduled for his MMR a week from today.

I'd recommend reading Amazon.com: What Your Doctor May Not Tell You About Children's Vaccinations: Stephanie Cave, Deborah Mitchell: Books and Amazon.com: The Parents' Concise Guide to Childhood Vaccinations: From Newborns to Teens, Practical Medical and Natural Ways to Protect Your Child: Lauren Feder: Books before getting the vaccine.

[ProspectiveSingleMom]

Originally Posted by Whirled_Peas

There is a Congressional fund that will pay out hundreds of thousands of dollars to any family whose child has been killed or injured by vaccines. Over 90 payments have been made for children who died as a result of vaccinations. If vaccines are so safe, why would this fund even exist?

The young lady I mentioned earlier who recieves money from this fund has profound MR due her seizure disorder (Lennox-Gastout Syndrome), and most children with that disorder do not reach age 2. She was one of the lucky ones, though. The last time I saw her she was 18, and I assume she is still alive today.

Although I am not anti-vaccine and would likely follow the recommended guidelines if I had a baby (I'm adopting an older child, so won't have to deal with this issue as much), I can totally understand why some parents choose not to vaccinate.

I've seen both sides. In the institution where I work now, we have some older residents who were "rubella babies" -- their mothers were exposed to rubella during pregnancy -- and all of them have blindless (born with no eyes), deafness, and profound MR. (Not all babies exposed to rubella in utero are that severely affected, depending on when in the pregnancy the exposure occurred).

I believe that vaccines do more good than harm, but I also believe that the researchers and manufacturers could be doing more to decrease the risks.

[SupaModel]

Originally Posted by KatiesEd-dad

That statement is very false and misleading. Just because a high percentage of children are vaccinated does not mean that the virus does not exist in the wild. You can be vaccinated and still be a carrier. These viruses do not totally disappear. With the amount of international air travel, viruses can spread around the world very quickly. Vaccinations were developed because these diseases were horrible. While everyone is entitled to raise their child their own way, I cannot understand why parents would want to take the risk of their child developing an awful, possibly fatal, disease. This has been highly charged issue in previous threads and I don't expect this one to be any different. As someone who works in healthcare and sees the suffering first hand, I can't imagine why anyone would put there child through that if there was a vaccine available.

I wonder what are the real numbers of parents who chose not to vaccinate? IRL I don't anyone who doesn't vaccinate. I really don't care what people do with their children as long as it doesn't affect mine.

[MamaS]

Do you tell the people who come in contact with your child that he/she is not vaccinated? I don't mean school or daycare where you would have to provide paperwork, but the church nursery or Mother's Morning Out Group.
What about mothers and kids at the community pool or at a birthday party for a mutual friend?
You have every right to decide whether your child is exposed to the dangers of vaccines or not. Shouldn't other parents have the right to decide whether they want their children exposed to the dangers of children who are not vaccinated?
EXAMPLE:My grandson is 5 years old. He plays soccer. All the kids on the team have identical uniforms, sports bags, and water bottles. Even though the bottles have the kids names clearly written, they can't all read and bottles get swapped. Last season we found out about one child when he came down with the measles and then a teammate's younger sister caught it too. This year one of the parents asked about requiring proof of immunizations in order to join the team. Don't we have the right to protect our children the best way we know how?

[DPline]

Originally Posted by SupaModel

I think the children who are not vaccinated would be more at risk right?? Not kids that are already vaccinated. If I am wrong please let me know.

I never thought that DS would catch something from a child that wasn't vaccinated. If this is true I would be LIVID if anyone (school, daycare etc...) had my child in an enviorment where he could get sick. I'm talking major rage!

My understanding (as a Mom, not a medical professional) is the concern is for children who have been immunized but the immunization wasn't effective (not many people have titers done to see if their child has full immunity) and younger children who have not had their full schedule of immunizations yet. And then also adults who are immune suppressed due to diseases, medications, etc.

(I do understand that their are valid reasons at times for not immunizing children or following a delayed schedule. I am just responding to SupaModel's statement. It is not ment as a critcisim of anyone here's choices, as I don't know your particular situation. )

[Whirled_Peas]

Originally Posted by DPline

My understanding (as a Mom, not a medical professional) is the concern is for children who have been immunized but the immunization wasn't effective (not many people have titers done to see if their child has full immunity) and younger children who have not had their full schedule of immunizations yet. And then also adults who are immune suppressed due to diseases, medications, etc.

(I do understand that their are valid reasons at times for not immunizing children or following a delayed schedule. I am just responding to SupaModel's statement. It is not ment as a critcisim of anyone here's choices, as I don't know your particular situation. )

I am an RN who has been vaccinated for measles MULTIPLE times. I am not immune. There was recently a measles outbreak in our city. One of my patients had a theoretical exposure to the measles. I was unwilling to get the vaccine again given how many times I've had it. Mainly I was unwilling to get it again because I am nursing my son. According to the vaccine manufacturer, a nursing mom can give all three of the diseases to their nursling. Although I was not too concerned about my son getting measles, I didn't want him to have the theoretical chance to have all the diseases at once. Even bigger than that, we never know when we'll get THE call about a baby. Since I will nurse the baby, I could not even risk the theoretical transmission of even one disease to a newborn. I could also not risk getting measles from my patient and giving it to a newborn. I was not concerned about my 2.5 year old getting it, but for a newborn it could be devastating. So, I stayed away from that patient during her theoretical contagious period. Of course she never got the disease and my paycheck was short and the baby never came, but oh well.

[KatiesEd-dad]

While I'm not trying to start the heated debate I do want to get one point across in this post.

First off, I want every one over the age of 35 to look at their left arm, between the elbow and the shoulder, on the outside of the arm......ok......everyone done checking.....you should see what looks like a small round scar....is it there???

That is the scar from the small pox vaccine. Routine vaccination for small pox was stopped in the early 1980's because the CDC and the WHO had determined that small pox had been eradicated in the wild. The only place that it is known to still exist is in the labs of the US Government and Russia. When the disease was eradicated, they stopped vaccinating. We still vaccinate for measles, mumps, rubella, varicella (chicken pox) and a host of other diseases. These vaccinations are not done just because. They are done because the viruses still exist in the world and there are still outbreaks of them today, especially in the third world where vaccinations are not as common as they are in the developed world. Everyone still with me???

Some cite the horrible consequences that a very small percentage of vaccine recipients will incur. Did you know that with the small pox vaccine that 1 out of every 15,000 will contract actual small pox and die? This is why the CDC has decided that they would not prophylacticly vaccinate for small pox again in the post 9/11 world. There plan is that if there is an outbreak, they will vaccinate and re-vaccinate health care providers who can then vaccinate the general population.

We have become spoiled in this country. We have not seen the large scale effects from disease in our life time largely due to the vaccination efforts during the 50's, 60's and 70's. Most of the physicians working today have never witnesses rampant disease in their patient population. I realize that the parents who choose not to vaccinate are thinking that they are doing what they think is best but if we all adopted that attitude then, in about 20 years, we would have a nation that was rampant with diseases that would kill thousands if not millions.

[BlessedbySnuggs]

Ed....Great posts! Completely agree with what you said!

[gracemetcalf]

Originally Posted by KatiesEd-dad

I realize that the parents who choose not to vaccinate are thinking that they are doing what they think is best but if we all adopted that attitude then, in about 20 years, we would have a nation that was rampant with diseases that would kill thousands if not millions.

But all parents can and should do is what THEY determine to be best for THEIR kids. Your advice may be sound for you and yours but advice is never one size fits all.

[sbaglio]

Sigh...this gets me heated, as it's my area of expertise (pediatric infectious diseases). So I won't go into it, as there are already people out there who are fighting the good fight for vaccination.

I will say what I said before on another thread. I could care less what choices you make about vaccinating your child, as long as that doesn't affect my child. But truth be told, it does affect my child if you do not vaccinate your own. So it's personal.

I have told my sister to stop allowing my 2 1/2 year old niece play with the little boy in her complex because he is not vaccinated, and is often ill. With what, who knows. But heaven forbid he acquires measles one day and passes it on to her, or through her, to my daughter. They would be locking me up that very day, I swear.

"Experts" don't just pull opinions from their backsides. Recommendations are based on numerous randomized, controlled trials, and are published in peer-reviewed journals by people who dedicate their lives to studying these issues. The proponderance of evidence points towards the benefits of vaccination. The supposed link between vaccines and autism has been debunked in countless studies.

For people to twist the story of the government providing compensation to a family because "he got autism because of vaccination" is despicable. Go educate yourselves because that is half the story. This child had Lennox-Gastault syndrome, a rare seizure disorder that I have seen in only two patients. These symptoms were inevitable.

And I do research work in sub-Saharan Africa. If any of the doubters want to come with me the next time I go, please, let's arrange it. Think measles, rubella, mumps, varicella, pertussis are diseases of the past? I bet you'll be calling your pediatrician to make an appointment before we even get back to the US.

This debate is so infuriating.