OT: Did you give your dc the chicken pox vaccine?

[ohiominnie]

Confused here, how can those who choose not to vaccinate put those of us who choose to vaccinate at risk? Isn't that supposed to be the point of the vaccinations, to protect us from that very thing?

Amie

With any vaccine, there isn't a 100% effectiveness rate. So even if kids ARE vaccinated with, for example, the pertussis vaccine, they could be exposed to someone with pertussis (a non-vaccinated individual) and could still get it. The chances are less, but it's better if EVERYONE gets vaccinated and you don't have those bad cases around ---it's called "herd immunity."

 

[ohiominnie]

What if the vaccince wears off as they get older and then they get sick as an adult? Chickenpox as an adult is horrible!

Chicken pox as an adult is horrible. I agree. I had it. (my second case of it---my first being in 4th grade)

But all we know of chicken pox as an adult is "non-CP-vaccinated" adults. I wonder what CP as an adult will be like for those who have had the vaccine (at least once)

Hmmmmm....

 

[ohiominnie]

With any vaccine, there isn't a 100% effectiveness rate. So even if kids ARE vaccinated with, for example, the pertussis vaccine, they could be exposed to someone with pertussis (a non-vaccinated individual) and could still get it. The chances are less, but it's better if EVERYONE gets vaccinated and you don't have those bad cases around ---it's called "herd immunity."

Must add....dh is a pediatrician and I was just telling him about this...
and he said....he just had a 3 1/2 yr who had had ALL of his shots up to date, who had pertussis. He was a pretty sick little boy.

 

[MommaSnowwhite]

My DD8 did get the shot when she was little - She was exposed in early April to a faimily that had active CP and she came down with a very mild case (3 pox total). I am so glad that she had the shot - the family that exposed her was very sick.

 

[4eyedbuzzard]

LOL,.! Your child is not at risk due to the non-vaccination of mine.

What's missing, is the proof that chicken pox needs to be erradicated. I personally don't see the need. Should we attempt to erradicate every bacteria and virus that causes discomfort? I don't think so.

LOL, actually, the state isn't. It just moves more slowly. But you're right, what's a little discomfort. I have the right to liberty. Long live polio, diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, measles, mumps, rubella, and all. A small cost when when "I personally don't see the need." Nothing worth sacrificing indiviual freedom and ideology over.

I say get rid of all this public health nonsense - bring back the good old days - when botulism was a sauce.

 

[meandtheguys2]

LOL, actually, the state isn't. It just moves more slowly. But you're right, what's a little discomfort. I have the right to liberty. Long live polio, diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, measles, mumps, rubella, and all. A small cost when when "I personally don't see the need." Nothing worth sacrificing indiviual freedom and ideology over.

I say get rid of all this public health nonsense - bring back the good old days - when botulism was a sauce.

You know, when you stand at the funeral of a baby you loved, the potential of disease just doesn't seem like a huge concern. Pertussis might have made her ill. The shot killed her.

 

[acpalmer]

Pertussis might have made her ill. The shot killed her.

Pertussis might have killed her as well. Chances are that if she reacted that badly to the vaccine, she would have reacted just as badly to the actual disease.

 

[ZuZugal]

You know, when you stand at the funeral of a baby you loved, the potential of disease just doesn't seem like a huge concern. Pertussis might have made her ill. The shot killed her.

I'm very sorry for your loss...

 

[4eyedbuzzard]

Every year some people are killed by seat belts - my best friend was one. Yet every year 100 times that number are saved - including mine once. There are always individual tragedies, which is why we don't judge our collective efforts based on unique occurances. I don't suggest that people don't wear seat belts because of my friend's death, or that that do so because of my survival. I suggest that they do wear them because given the whole of our experience, they have proven to increase their chance of survival.

An analogy: If 10 out of 1000 children are dying of a disease every year and we can prevent 9 of those deaths, but 1 will die from the preventative measures(vaccine) do we vaccinate?

Well, without the vaccine children have a 1% chance of dying. With the vaccine, children have a .2% chance. Where 10 of a 1000 died previously, now only 2 do. Yes, it sucks if you're the one who dies from the "cure." Our world and this life isn't perfect and there are no guarantees, there are always individual exceptions and tragedies. But what is the suggested alternative to trying to give everyone the best overall chance based upon our collective wisdom and experience?

 

[meandtheguys2]

I'm very sorry for your loss...

Thanks. Our world was turned upside down.

I am thrilled to live in a country that still has individual rights. I also love living in a country where people aren't ostracized fro their choices, or their illnesses. My group of HIV clients would agree, I'm sure. You can't protect yourself from everything. Nor, is it healthy to try. I could choose to ostracize myself, place my family in a bubble, and follow every medical "miracle" that comes along, or I can choose to fully participate in life. I'll take my chances with whole real foods, excercise, laughing, and peace of a shot in the butt any day.

BTW, it doesn't just "suck."

 

[Bird-Mom]

There comes a point in an ordered society of lives(not souls) where the physical and medical rights and expectations of the majority of citizens outweigh the philosophical rights of the minority. When religious and/or medical beliefs have a negative effect on the greater common good, that of compromising public health, it is the right of citizenry to DEMAND compliance - regardless of the beliefs of those who wish not to comply.

Just as we mandate laws for sewage treatment, potable water, air quality, etc in part to stop the spread of disease, we also do similarly by trying to innoculate our citizens from disease. This is not a 3rd world country, nor do we live in the ignorance of the past. And though we remain ignorant of many pathologies, we have made great accomplishments in the past 100 years or so. We know the cause of, and can prevent many commonly occuring diseases that have large negative effects on the masses, and cause preventable suffering in large numbers of our citizens. Those who claim some religious or philosophical "right" to expose the majority of citizens to communicable disease and to aid and provide safe-harbor to pathogens which harm us, simply to satisfy their ideology, should be ostracized. They should be banned from the workplace and public areas, and likewise, their children should be banned from public schools. Part of a vaccination program is not just the prevention of the disease in individuals, but the eradication of the disease itself. Polio and Smallpox are prime examples of common devastating diseases that became almost unknown in the latter half of the 20th century due to aggressive vaccination efforts.

While our religious beliefs are varied, and some may say it's "God's will that disease occurs", many more of us tend to say that it's "God's will that we destroy or prevent disease". As a society of humans, we deal with the physical and living - preventing human suffering outweighs ideological insult. A person's soul is their own business. But one's body, from the standpoint that one may use it to harbor and/or spread disease, is not.

My philosophy is that if your philosophy includes allowing preventable disease and human suffering to continue when preventable, then your philosophy sucks. I condemn it.

/rant

I absolutely, completely disagree with you. My first responsibility is to MY children, and if I decide not to shoot them full of poisons, then AMEN. Should my personal liberties and religious freedoms (and you are way off base in guessing my philosophy) be taken away, I would move to another country before someone forces me to stick my family with poision.

 

[Bird-Mom]

With any vaccine, there isn't a 100% effectiveness rate. So even if kids ARE vaccinated with, for example, the pertussis vaccine, they could be exposed to someone with pertussis (a non-vaccinated individual) and could still get it. The chances are less, but it's better if EVERYONE gets vaccinated and you don't have those bad cases around ---it's called "herd immunity."

I just want to point out that the pertussis vax is pretty much a joke. It has a very low conversion rate and is somewhat ineffective. Pertussis will never be erradicated through the use of vaccination. It is endemic. Herd immunity will not prevent "bad cases." How severely a person reacts to disease is more about how healthy they are in the first place. Both vaxed and non-vaxed individuals can carry disease and not appear sick.

FTR, non-vaccinated children are not dirty, filthy and full of disease. They are not threats to society, out to make your vaccinated children sick.

 

[ohiominnie]

As my dh tells his patients (or rather the parents of his patients).....you have a better chance of getting hit by a truck on the way home from the appointment than you do from having a reaction to the vaccine.

But that doesn't stop (most) people from driving.

 

[Oceana]

Those who claim some religious or philosophical "right" to expose the majority of citizens to communicable disease and to aid and provide safe-harbor to pathogens which harm us, simply to satisfy their ideology, should be ostracized. They should be banned from the workplace and public areas, and likewise, their children should be banned from public schools. Part of a vaccination program is not just the prevention of the disease in individuals, but the eradication of the disease itself. Polio and Smallpox are prime examples of common devastating diseases that became almost unknown in the latter half of the 20th century due to aggressive vaccination efforts.

While our religious beliefs are varied, and some may say it's "God's will that disease occurs", many more of us tend to say that it's "God's will that we destroy or prevent disease". As a society of humans, we deal with the physical and living - preventing human suffering outweighs ideological insult. A person's soul is their own business. But one's body, from the standpoint that one may use it to harbor and/or spread disease, is not.

My philosophy is that if your philosophy includes allowing preventable disease and human suffering to continue when preventable, then your philosophy sucks. I condemn it.

/rant

Its a good thing our nation is based on freedom of religion and not your rant. All people being created equal no matter what!

Denying vaccinations is not just that god intended disease its mostlikly more often its about what is in those vaccines and how they were created and how they were tested

 

[meandtheguys2]

As my dh tells his patients (or rather the parents of his patients).....you have a better chance of getting hit by a truck on the way home from the appointment than you do from having a reaction to the vaccine.

But that doesn't stop (most) people from driving.

True, but everyone makes their own choices of the risks they are willing to take. I wouldn't buy a trampoline, but allow my boys to use the men's room. I wouldn't live by a river but allow my kids to run around the neighborhood. I wouldn't follow any doctor's orders without solid information to confirm, but I allow my boys to play with sticks like swords, and shoot .22's.

We all make our choices depending on our circumstances and our knowledge base. My niece wasn't hit by a car, DH's cousin wasn't hit by a car. My niece died. His cousin is deaf due to vaccines.

 

[kaysmommie]

Both my children had the vaccine when they turned 12 months old and they had no reaction at all and were perfectly fine. So far they have not had chicken pox either. I sure hope they don't because I am 34 and ahve never had chicken pox. I did get the vaccine though. If I got chicken pox it could be very serious. I feel most vaccinations are neceesary. In the good old days people died from alot of these diseases, lets not bring them back.

 

[katerkat]

My philosophy is that if your philosophy includes allowing preventable disease and human suffering to continue when preventable, then your philosophy sucks. I condemn it.

Nice, but my philosophy is that I don't know what so many vaccines can do to immune systems in the future. So personally, I choose to not immunize my child with the ones I don't think are as "important." I don't think chicken pox is terrible enough to vaccinate against.

 

[jodifla]

Nice, but my philosophy is that I don't know what so many vaccines can do to immune systems in the future. So personally, I choose to not immunize my child with the ones I don't think are as "important." I don't think chicken pox is terrible enough to vaccinate against.

Some of the complications you are exposing your children to by not getting the vaccine include viral pneumonia, brain infection and flesh-eating disease.



US Chicken Pox Deaths Plunge after vaccine introduced


http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2005/02/02/chicken-pox-050102.html

 

[beccalines]

The kindergardern where my MIL teaches had an out breeak of chicken pox in their class of vaccinated children. Almost 3/4th of the class got it. It was a milder form for some, but they still all missed 1-1 1/2 weeks of school.

If I didn't vaccinate my child and something happened I would feel bad.
If I did vaccinate my child and something happened I would feel bad.

You just have to do what you think is best for your child. Some people die from strep or even common colds. We weren't meant to live to 200.

As my mom puts it, "If I can't be 100 and feel like I'm 30, then kill me at 99."

 

[meandtheguys2]

As my mom puts it, "If I can't be 100 and feel like I'm 30, then kill me at 99."

I like your mom!