The Vaccination Thread

[Chary]

Refusing to protect your children from life-threatening illnesses because you've fallen for disproven quackery, internet woo, crazed hate campaigns, scaremongering anecdotes, lies about mercury and YouTube conspiracy theories is, I'm afraid, nothing short of child abuse. Parents are prosecuted and children removed to safety for other forms of neglect and I don't see why anti-vaxxers should be any different. And it's nothing to do with 'personal choice' or freedom, your own personal freedom ends at endangering yourself, not your child and the children of everyone else in society.

Disproven quackery? I hate to burst your bubble, but I have been to court, have legally-approved evidence, and an official blood test that state that me getting immunizations caused me to get Sepsis (A deadly disease, mind you). "Personal Freedom" from the government, FORCED me to get a shot, that nearly killed me. If the reasons for immunizations are to protect children, then they are doing a terrible terrible job at "protecting".

 

[BlueStar]

Disproven quackery? I hate to burst your bubble, but I have been to court, have legally-approved evidence, and an official blood test that state that me getting immunizations caused me to get Sepsis (A deadly disease, mind you). "Personal Freedom" from the government, FORCED me to get a shot, that nearly killed me. If the reasons for immunizations are to protect children, then they are doing a terrible terrible job at "protecting".

You didn't read the link demonstrating the quackery I'm referring to, did you. I'm sorry you feel you've had a bad experience with a vaccine, and I don't know the specifics of your case, but generally vaccines greatly reduce your risk of sepsis - although no medical procedure is completely free of risk. I'd be interested in the wording of your blood test results, because I don't believe you can actual say with certainty the cause of a positive result.
But yes, I beleive the government was right to force you to get your shot.

More widely, completely counter to what you're claiming, vaccination is doing an absolutely fucking brilliant job of protecting children

Fewer youngsters worldwide are dying of childhood diseases now than at any other time in history. About 80% of children today are vaccinated against such deadly illnesses as measles and polio, compared with 20% in the early 1980s.*
There were an estimated 30 to 40 million cases of measles in 2000, causing some 777,000 deaths.*
...immunization can be credited with saving approximately 9 million lives a year worldwide. A further 16 million deaths a year could be prevented if effective vaccines were deployed against all potentially vaccine-preventable diseases.*
"Health officials say aggressive efforts to vaccinate young children against measles have resulted in a 74 percent global decline in the number of deaths due to the illness [between 2000 and 2007]. Experts say the biggest decline, 90 percent, occurred in the Eastern Mediterranean region."*
In England and Wales, measles cases increased 36% in 2008.* Measles cases more than doubled from the year before during the first half of 2008 in the United States.*
"Before smallpox was eradicated with a vaccine, it killed an estimated 500 million people. And just 60 years ago, polio paralyzed 16,000 Americans every year, while rubella caused birth defects and mental retardation in as many as 20,000 newborns. Measles infected 4 million children, killing 3,000 annually, and a bacterium called Haemophilus influenzae type b caused Hib meningitis in more than 15,000 children, leaving many with permanent brain damage. Infant mortality and abbreviated life spans — now regarded as a third world problem — were a first world reality."

 

[Chary]

You didn't read the link demonstrating the quackery I'm referring to, did you. I'm sorry you feel you've had a bad experience with a vaccine, and I don't know the specifics of your case, but generally vaccines greatly reduce your risk of sepsis - although no medical procedure is completely free of risk. I'd be interested in the wording of your blood test results, because I don't believe you can actual say with certainty the cause of a positive result.
But yes, I beleive the government was right to force you to get your shot.

More widely, completely counter to what you're claiming, vaccination is doing an absolutely fucking brilliant job of protecting children

Yes, I know it's great that many lives are saved yearly thanks to immunizations. I'm glad for those 9 mill saved. The thing I hate though, is that I'll be forced to renew my immunizations come next year. Law dictates it. While vaccines save many, it can also be harmful. While I was free from Tetanus, Dipitheria, and polio, I still got sick. Quite honestly, I'm fearful for that day when I have to get immunizations again...If I had a free choice, I'd rather take my chances against Dipitheria, over shots.

 

[BlueStar]

Feeling sick after an injection is better than being paralyzed for life from polio though. Also I'm afraid herd immunity means the implications are much wider than it just being a personal decision on if you'd rather risk a perceived shot related illness or the risk of the disease the shot is going to protect yourself against. If 25% of people refuse to get a shot, that puts 100% of the population at risk from deadly illness, especially at the point in their life where they're too young to have yet been protected.

This couple don't believe in what scientists tell them, they thought they were doing the best for their children, they thought it was their choice and their decision...
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...aith-healing-death-teen-son-article-1.1162793

At what point do you draw the line and say "Sorry, the evidence doesn't back up your position and the right of people to not needlessly die of illness overrules your right to paranoid delusion"? I'm not comparing all people who have unfounded but understandable fears about vaccines to that couple, but when you have people like Jenny McCarthy, or those who have pox parties and intentionally expose children to fatal diseases to 'boost their immune system' and other such tripe rather than having extensively tested, safe vaccines I think it edges into that kind of territory.

 

[Densetsu]

I obviously don't know everything there is to know about vaccinations (even an immunologist would be hard-pressed to make such a claim), but I do consider myself better-informed than the average person on this matter. At the very least, I can speak from the point of view of a soon-to-be-physician.

Here are four facts:

Spoiler: 1. Vaccines ARE NOT 100% safe.

Medicine in general doesn't deal in certainties; it deals in probabilities. If you have appendicitis, the logical thing to do would be to remove your appendix before it bursts and you go into septic shock. That doesn't mean that the surgery itself isn't risky. But the possible complications that can arise from undergoing surgery are better than the complications that can arise from not undergoing surgery. The same holds true for vaccinations.

You hear about cases like Michael Jackson's physician prescribing drugs that ultimately killed him, but those are media-sensationalized stories that are few and far between. There are close to a million physicians in the US alone. How many stories have you heard about physicians administering drugs that harm people? Ten stories? One hundred? One thousand? Let's say that each of those 1,000,000 physicians administers a vaccine at some point in their careers. If you had read 1,000 news articles of 1,000 separate instances where those vaccinations caused a significant problem in children, that would be a frequency of only 0.1%.

Your child will be exposed to even greater risks during high school and college (bullying and other student violence, sports, illicit drugs, alcohol, unprotected sex, teen driving, overall reckless acts of stupidity). Does that mean you should prevent them from going to school? From ever getting a driver's license? From trying out for the wrestling team? Heaven forbid they go to parties! I'm willing to bet that your child is more likely to die in a car accident than to suffer any long-term side effects from a vaccine.

Spoiler: 2. Vaccines ARE a lucrative business for pharmaceutical companies.

Big Pharma develops drugs not to make people better, but rather to make money. The only reason they even give a damn about making their products work is that doctors will refuse to administer the drugs if they don't work. Drug reps go to hospitals and private practices, peddle their wares, give free pens, paper pads and drug samples, then wine and dine physicians just to get them to look at what they have to offer. The physicians then look at the research and decide if they think the drug is safe and effective enough to use. If the physician doesn't like the drug, s/he turns the drug rep down. So rest assured that if a physician is administering a drug, he or she will have done the research necessary to ensure that it's good enough for their patients.

So yes, physicians advise you to get vaccinated. Yes, pharmaceutical companies make money off of these vaccinations. But they are a necessary evil; physicians think they're greedy slimeballs just as you do, but the doctors do have some sway over them. They basically tell the drug reps "make your shit work, or GTFO."

Spoiler: 3. Vaccines ARE effective in conferring protection against disease.

There's overwhelming evidence to support this. I challenge you to find a legitimate medical research article that says otherwise (i.e., don't use articles written by journalists or reporters to back up your arguments).

Again, physicians wouldn't use them if they weren't effective. Their careers are always at stake. Physicians are subject to review and are required to re-certify their medical license every few years to keep up with the constant growth of medical knowledge. If they were blindly administering vaccines without caring about the possible repercussions, they could lose their license to practice.

Spoiler: 4. Vaccines DO NOT have an established link to autism.

Several studies confirm this. Furthermore mercury compounds, the ingredient in vaccines that is suspected to be the cause of learning disabilities, haven't been used as a vaccine preservative for the past decade. In spite of this, autism has continued to rise in children born after the decision to stop using mercury was made. This suggests that other factors are the cause for autism.

 

[SifJar]

Excellent post, SifJar, though I will say it is possible for automation to stop and correct itself on a precisely routine basis, and that great amounts of testing would need to be done before any given automation is deployed.

Of course, I should have mentioned that obviously there will be various safeguards and checks in place, so the chance of something going wrong is significantly reduced, but there is still a chance (however minute) that something could go wrong.

As I mentioned in previous posts on the subject, Thimerosal is approx 50% mercury and is still used in vaccines despite numerous groups and agencies (including the American Academy of Pediatrics and the FDA) suggesting it be removed as soon as possible. 4 out of 9 currently manufactured flu vaccines contain mercury. Do you know which of the 9 you're getting? Are you cool with that?

I'm going to quote the wikipedia page here [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thiomersal - plenty of citations in the relevant sections, please read them before claiming it is inaccurate because it's a wiki]:

In the United States, countries in the European Union and a few other affluent countries, thiomersal is no longer used as a preservative in routine childhood vaccination schedules.[3] In the U.S., the only exceptions among vaccines routinely recommended for children are some formulations of the inactivated influenza vaccine for children older than two years.[7] Several vaccines that are not routinely recommended for young children do contain thiomersal, including DT (diphtheria and tetanus), Td (tetanus and diphtheria), and TT (tetanus toxoid); other vaccines may contain a trace of thiomersal from steps in manufacture.[4] Also, four rarely used treatments for pit viper, coral snake, and black widow venom still contain thiomersal.[8] Outside North America and Europe, many vaccines contain thiomersal; the World Health Organization has concluded that there is no evidence of toxicity from thiomersal in vaccines and no reason on safety grounds to change to more expensive single-dose administration.[9]

Following a review of mercury-containing food and drugs mandated in 1999, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and the American Academy of Pediatrics asked vaccine manufacturers to remove thiomersal from vaccines as a purely precautionary measure, and it was rapidly phased out of most U.S. and European vaccines.[5][19] Many parents saw the action to remove thiomersal–in the setting of a perceived increasing rate of autism as well as increasing number of vaccines in the childhood vaccination schedule–as indicating that the preservative was the cause of autism.[5] Thescientific consensus is that there is no scientific evidence supporting these claims, including the observation that the rate of autism continues to climb despite elimination of thiomersal from routine childhood vaccines.[20][21][22] Major scientific and medical bodies such as the Institute of Medicine[22] and World Health Organization[23] as well as governmental agencies such as the Food and Drug Administration[4] and the CDC[24] reject any role for thiomersal in autism or other neurodevelopmental disorders.[25]

As you can see here, in the US and EU, Thimerosal is no longer commonly used. It is only in fact used in some formulations of one common vaccination for children over two years old, and besides that only in some very few, rarely used vaccinations. Organisations including the WHO and FDA have concluded there is no evidence of danger from it's use, it's removal was purely precautionary.

As for the 4 out of 9 statistic, I don't personally get flu vaccinations, but if I did, yes I would be happy with having one with mercury in it. BlueStar's link offers some helpful advice on this, basically stating that ethylmercury (used in vaccinations) doesn't pose much risk, methylmercury (found in the environment) is the dangerous one. Plus you should always be able to request from your doctor to have a vaccination without such ingredients (although of course I understand that couldn't have happened with the story of your child, where the nurse didn't discuss anything with you first, so you could not have asked)

 

[porkiewpyne]

LOL Darnit [user]Densetsu[/user]. Was about to post a similar rebuttal but mine was way way way crappier than yours. No wonder I got kicked outta med school TT^TT

 

[retKHAAAN]

I obviously don't know everything there is to know about vaccinations (even an immunologist would be hard-pressed to make such a claim), but I do consider myself better-informed than the average person on this matter. At the very least, I can speak from the point of view of a soon-to-be-physician.

Here are four facts:

Spoiler: 1. Vaccines ARE NOT 100% safe.

Medicine in general doesn't deal in certainties; it deals in probabilities. If you have appendicitis, the logical thing to do would be to remove your appendix before it bursts and you go into septic shock. That doesn't mean that the surgery itself isn't risky. But the possible complications that can arise from undergoing surgery are better than the complications that can arise from not undergoing surgery. The same holds true for vaccinations.

You hear about cases like Michael Jackson's physician prescribing drugs that ultimately killed him, but those are media-sensationalized stories that are few and far between. There are close to a million physicians in the US alone. How many stories have you heard about physicians administering drugs that harm people? Ten stories? One hundred? One thousand? Let's say that each of those 1,000,000 physicians administers a vaccine at some point in their careers. If you had read 1,000 news articles of 1,000 separate instances where those vaccinations caused a significant problem in children, that would be a frequency of only 0.1%.

Your child will be exposed to even greater risks during high school and college (bullying and other student violence, sports, illicit drugs, alcohol, unprotected sex, teen driving, overall reckless acts of stupidity). Does that mean you should prevent them from going to school? From ever getting a driver's license? From trying out for the wrestling team? Heaven forbid they go to parties! I'm willing to bet that your child is more likely to die in a car accident than to suffer any long-term side effects from a vaccine.

Spoiler: 2. Vaccines ARE a lucrative business for pharmaceutical companies.

Big Pharma develops drugs not to make people better, but rather to make money. The only reason they even give a damn about making their products work is that doctors will refuse to administer the drugs if they don't work. Drug reps go to hospitals and private practices, peddle their wares, give free pens, paper pads and drug samples, then wine and dine physicians just to get them to look at what they have to offer. The physicians then look at the research and decide if they think the drug is safe and effective enough to use. If the physician doesn't like the drug, s/he turns the drug rep down. So rest assured that if a physician is administering a drug, he or she will have done the research necessary to ensure that it's good enough for their patients.

So yes, physicians advise you to get vaccinated. Yes, pharmaceutical companies make money off of these vaccinations. But they are a necessary evil; physicians think they're greedy slimeballs just as you do, but the doctors do have some sway over them. They basically tell the drug reps "make your shit work, or GTFO."

Spoiler: 3. Vaccines ARE effective in conferring protection against disease.

There's overwhelming evidence to support this. I challenge you to find a legitimate medical research article that says otherwise (i.e., don't use articles written by journalists or reporters to back up your arguments).

Again, physicians wouldn't use them if they weren't effective. Their careers are always at stake. Physicians are subject to review and are required to re-certify their medical license every few years to keep up with the constant growth of medical knowledge. If they were blindly administering vaccines without caring about the possible repercussions, they could lose their license to practice.

Spoiler: 4. Vaccines DO NOT have an established link to autism.

Several studies confirm this. Furthermore mercury compounds, the ingredient in vaccines that is suspected to be the cause of learning disabilities, haven't been used as a vaccine preservative for the past decade. In spite of this, autism has continued to rise in children born after the decision to stop using mercury was made. This suggests that other factors are the cause for autism.

I fully understand that there are dangers everywhere. But if there is no link at all to autism, then why are courts awarding money in cases that claim otherwise?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/david-kirby/post2468343_b_2468343.html
(True regardless of being on huffpost...)

Also, can you honestly tell me that the maybe 10,000 people total who drugs are tested on before being made available are indicative of how 3 billion people might react to them?

I have been reading the links people have been sharing. I appreciate all the information.

@Bluestar
Really? Child abuse? You should probably report me then.

 

[Gahars]

I fully understand that there are dangers everywhere. But if there is no link at all to autism, then why are courts awarding money in cases that claim otherwise?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/david-kirby/post2468343_b_2468343.html
(True regardless of being on huffpost...)

Because courts can make ill-informed, rash decisions - they are staffed by human beings as vulnerable to superstition as the rest of us. The Supreme Court of New York, for example, ruled that a house was legally considered to be haunted by ghosts - in 1991, mind you.

The scientific evidence overwhelmingly finds absolutely no link between vaccines and autism. "Now," you say, "A test only uses a relatively small sample size. Surely it can't represent everyone." The problem is, this has been tested again and again and again and again and again and again and again (just to use a few examples). If there was a definite link, it stands to reason that vaccine-caused autism would sprout up in any population. And yet, after years upon years of tireless, endless research (each taking into account a variety of different variables), that link has never been found. One test may be a fluke, sure, but when it has literally never been found in a properly conducted scientific study, it stands to reason that the link just isn't there.

The only evidence for the anti-vaccine crowd, on the other hand, is entirely anecdotal or baselessly drawing causation from correlation. These people are the medical equivalent of truthers. From my experience, they don't want to face the harsh, unfortunate reality of the matter - so they invent their own and latch onto it.

It's a shame, too, because they could use their money and clout to campaign against factors that actually seem to contribute to autism - public health concerns like obesity. They could be saving lives, rather than endangering them.

Child abuse?

While no one's questioning your good intentions, and I wouldn't quite call it "abuse" myself, try and understand it from another perspective. Not only is your child at risk of infection, but so are other children - especially those with compromised immune systems. I know you want absolutely nothing but the best for your child, but you're letting fear cloud your judgement, and that could have serious repercussions.

And where does it end? Would you not feed your child on the extremely remote chance they could get food poisoning?

 

[Wolvenreign]

Allow me to take this whole "child abuse" thing in a much less vitriolic direction. Wrettcaughn, do you not think that being as informed and rational as possible would be the best thing, not just for your child, but also for the rest of your life decisions? Surely that was your goal to begin with when you took an anti-vaccination stance on the issue. You didn't want to be duped into merely following a given direction on that direction's simplistic-seeming merits. That is doubt, and it is good; but it must be followed by rational, disciplined research if you want anything close to an accurate, realistic answer. For the sake of your child and everyone else's life that you impact, do you not think being correct is more important than merely having a stance?

I am not saying you have been unshakable in this, because you haven't. You have shown appreciation for the information provided. I am simply urging you to act upon it. To do so would, in fact, be a furthering of your own goals.

 

[retKHAAAN]

My specific fears originated from my son's heart condition. Supra-ventricular tachicardia. His heart was unable maintain a regular rhythm with the lower half misfiring and the upper half getting up to well over 200 bpm... We constantly monitored his heart rate, at least 5 times daily for over a year. The side-effects from his first couple rounds of vaccines combined with his already brittle health was and still is a serious concern. I'm happy to say that he's been off his medication for almost a hear now, but hat doesn't mean he's out of the woods... This condition typically resurfaces between the ages of 5 and 12 and can even occur into adulthood...

The previous suggestion of child abuse was incredibly offensive. This boy is happy and healthy as he could possibly be. We made all of his baby food ourselves from organic fruits,vegetables, and meats and he continues to eat nothing but organic, locally grown foods (never has a french fry or chicken nugget). He hasn't worn a disposable diaper since the day we left the hospital and has only ever even had diaper rash twice in nearly 2 years (and only while teething). We read. We play music (he can keep a rhythm on a drum and strum a ukulele). He's learning his alphabet (not even two years old and can point out all of his vowels and most of his consonants). So to tell me I'm abusing my child by questioning the safety of injections that have been known to exacerbate pre-existing conditions (which my son has) is pretty disturbing.

Arguing about opinions regarding videogames is one thing, questioning someone's ability as a parent is a very different beast...

 

[BlueStar]

Has your doctor told you that vaccines may not be right for your son, or have you come to this conclusion yourself by listening to unqualified Internet woo practitioners or hearing things like 'they have mercury in them'?

Because one is fine and the other is not.

 

[retKHAAAN]

Has your doctor told you that vaccines may not be right for your son, or have you come to this conclusion yourself by listening to unqualified Internet woo practitioners or hearing things like 'they have mercury in them'?

Because one is fine and the other is not.

And who dictates qualification? Boards who have it in their best interest to push out as much medicine as possible? I read studies. I understand the statistics. I understand herd immunity thresholds. However, two HUGE things every study tends to leave out are population lifestyle changes (cleanliness, etc) and better overall healthcare. Polio was already in decline before the vaccine was distributed to the point that many doctors in the 1940's didn't even think they'd be able to discern whether or not the vaccine had actually worked. Vaccines don't irradicate illness, they provide a buffer. Those vaccinated for measles can still get still get measles (I know because I did). I've not discounted or even sought to discredit vaccines, I've voiced doubts. That is all. I'm personally more confident in medicine to nurse my child back to health than I am in medicine claiming to prevent illness altogether...

It's a shame, too, because they could use their money and clout to campaign against factors that actually seem to contribute to autism - public health concerns like obesity. They could be saving lives, rather than endangering them.

I am certainly agreed on this. There is no need for "campaigns" against vaccinations especially with the many other public health concerns running rampant. However, there needs to be more education presented by physicians regarding both sides of the debate. There is a chance for something to go wrong. There is a chance of an adverse reation or a bad batch. I want my doctor to talk with me about vaccination before having a nurse walk in the room and stick my kid with a needle without saying a word to me or my wife about it first. I want my doctor to actually look at my son's history before robotically injecting virus in him (live or dead).

While no one's questioning your good intentions, and I wouldn't quite call it "abuse" myself, try and understand it from another perspective. Not only is your child at risk of infection, but so are other children - especially those with compromised immune systems. I know you want absolutely nothing but the best for your child, but you're letting fear cloud your judgement, and that could have serious repercussions.

And where does it end? Would you not feed your child on the extremely remote chance they could get food poisoning?

People certainly have questioned my good intentions.

That last line is a pretty poor example though I know what you're suggesting. Working in food service I can tell you that food poisoning is not nearly as remote as you seem to think. "Reported" food poisoning, maybe... But I digress...

My wife and I are meticulous in the care of our son. I am a realist, and a fairly pessimistic one at that. I know there are every day dangers lurking around every corner. Maybe it was that single piss-poor experience at the doctor and with my son's reactions afterwards that shook my confidence in the science of it all. As he's getting older my confidence grows that he can handle it. But 15 or more immunizations in the first few months of life are pretty tough to deal with, especially after all that kid had already gone through...

 

[J-Machine]

I remember 2 years ago when my autism course handed me the Jenna McCarthy book as the course material. It really made me question the validity of my college education. while it is still an unknown the role a vaccine can play in a child's development, to take an opinion as fact from a non specialist is dangerous. From what I've learned, the type and concentration of mercury shouldn't pose any threat to a child but then again we are only scratching the surface on understanding how very small concentrations in the body can sometimes be worse than large concentrations depending on the toxin absorbed. Also to keep on Autism; this is a developmental disorder. The potential causes (none which are considered definitive) are so numerous that even life in a bubble with no family history of the condition could 100 per cent prevent a diagnosis. The only fact we have is that it seems to affect children at around the time they are expected to start crawling - to the time walking and verbal communication is possible the most. If we want to play opinion piece I'd wager it's environmental/diet with a dash of genetic predisposition but this is about vaccine safety so I'm getting off topic.

Severe allergic reactions, adjuvenated vaccines, and compromised immune systems would be, in my opinion, the more dangerous factors in discussing the cons of getting a child vaccinated. Luckily doctors tend to not use adjuvenated vaccines anymore, will ask if you are experiencing flu like symptoms and if you are allergic to specific compounds like eggs that can be used in said vaccines, some of which have alternates for those with allergies to the common variant. The risk of complications are considered to be nothing compared to the pros they offer. However we do need more understanding with how vaccines potentially effect us that is a fact.

Vaccines really aren't for everyone. proper care and discussion should be considered before, during, and after a vaccination is taken to ensure optimal health of the individual. That is not to say we should fear them but like all things in life, we really should be educated before making any decisions.