Do you vaccinate?

[emma1325]

How do you feel about vaccines in general, and how do you apply those beliefs to your life?

[Ruthla]

Do you realize this is post 666 for you?

I'd say that number kind of sums up my attitude towards vaccinations.

[emma1325]

Originally Posted by Ruthla

Do you realize this is post 666 for you?

I'd say that number kind of sums up my attitude towards vaccinations.

Good thing I'm not superstitious!!

[PlayaMama]

i vax selectively and i think that it's very reflective of my choices in life.

i have a hard time adhering to a one-size fits all anything. i'm mostly vegetarian but i cook meat for my family and occasionally eat salmon, i am mostly anti-consumerism but i like to buy wooden toys for my kids, i eat mostly organic but i'm not going to skip the cheesecake because it's made with conventional dairy.

with vaxes, i think some of them are helpful and effective and i think some of them are better off left unused (chicken pox i'm looking at you).

i like to research (a lot!) and make up my own mind about what makes sense to me.

[Ruthla]

Man, you forgot the "other" option!

I used to vaccinate selectively and on a VERY delayed schedule. I don't vaccinate at all anymore.

[urchin_grey]

That's a big negative. I don't feel quite as strongly about it as other things though. I mean, I'd vax before I circ'd, kwim?

[carriebft]

Not sure where I would fit in. I guess we are moving more towards 'on schedule with a few we skip'. If you look at how we vaxed our youngest, many things were delayed because we didn't want to do a lot of vaccines at once and we skipped and really delayed a few (rota-skip, hep B-delay, pox- delay until school and hope for immunity, etc)

But I have recently come to feel that the larger combination vaccines have some real merit to them, including things like having less stuff in them, not having to go to the doctor as much, reduction of pain, reduction of money spent on copays, better immunity earlier, etc. So if we have another, that would be a serious consideration for us. That would put us more on schedule or even ahead of schedule, since the CDC schedule is not based on having these combinations.

[Magali]

No I don't vaccinate because unless we have emergencies we stay away from the medical community.

[D'sMama]

Where's "Other" or "I changed my mind along the way"?

[<<>>]

I fully vaxed on time until my oldest was almost 3 and my middle was 18 months, and my youngest was unborn.
I ceased all vax until I felt comfortable either way. And my children have not received a vax since. I am very comfortable with that.
I just watched Vaccine Nation (found it on youtube) and am even more comfortble with my decision (been years since I researched, and was glad for the 'refresher')
I think it kinda fits in with my way of life, I don't over use the medical establishment in any other ways. I think good hygiene and proper nutrition are what is best for them as of right now.

[Ruthla]

Originally Posted by carriebft

But I have recently come to feel that the larger combination vaccines have some real merit to them, including things like having less stuff in them, not having to go to the doctor as much, reduction of pain, reduction of money spent on copays, better immunity earlier, etc. So if we have another, that would be a serious consideration for us. That would put us more on schedule or even ahead of schedule, since the CDC schedule is not based on having these combinations.

So basically, the advantages of the combo vaccines, as you see it, comes down to "fewer total shots, fewer trips to the doctor, and you finish the vaccine series earlier."

I agree that fewer shots most likely means "less pain"- but you can't know that for certain. What if there's a more serious reaction to the combo vaccine, and it ends up hurting the baby even more than doing all the shots separately? I'd also ask whether "short term discomfort" (the pain of the injections themselves) is really an important factor when talking about something that potentially affects their overall health.

"Less money on copays" just means "fewer doctor's visits." But if you're going to the doctor on the recomended schedule, you wouldn't be reducing the number of visits or copays anyway. And many doctor's offices won't even charge extra if you come in for vaccines in between scheduled checkups. I had DS "catch up" on vaccines when he was 3 (as required for nursury school attendance; he had none before age 2.5) and I came in about once a month, after school, to see the nurse for vaccines. There was no charge for those visits whatsoever- my insurance was billed only for the vaccines, not the nurse's time.

I'm not sure how the combo vaccines create "better immunity earlier." Are you actually giving more vaccines in a shorter span of time, thus finishing vaccine series at a younger age? Or are you administering the same number of vaccines, just in fewer shots? Even if the baby does end up with more vaccines younger, does that truly equal "better immunity"?

It sounds to me like you need to do a lot more research on the combo vaccines if you have another baby. Study the actual side effects of the combo vaccines vs the same vaccines given individually. See if immunity to those diseases is the same with either form of vaccine. IMO, "fewer needle sticks and fewer trips to the doctor" are not valid reasons to go with a riskier form of vaccines. But that's only MY opinion. You need to do the research for yourself.

[onyxravnos]

mostly no. I got my ds the two meningitis shots but nothing else. when he gets older (like 12) there are a few I may give him if he hasn't caught them naturally by then.

and some like the chicken pox vax which i wont ever give.

[momo7]

No I don't vax...but now I am wondering if I should have. There has been an outbreak of Pertussis (whooping Cough) in my community and my children have been exposed to it and now we are fighting it off. I keep wondering if I had vaxed them would it have made a difference. Thier doctor told me that she has had cases where children who have been vaxed for it are coming down with it so I don't know....I'm more confused now than ever.

What really pisses me off about the whole thing is the fact that people are bringing their kids to church who have it, and are sending their kids to the parish school. What the hell? It pisses me off they are helping to spread it around like that. Am I wrong in this thinking?

[PlayaMama]

Originally Posted by momo7

No I don't vax...but now I am wondering if I should have. There has been an outbreak of Pertussis (whooping Cough) in my community and my children have been exposed to it and now we are fighting it off. I keep wondering if I had vaxed them would it have made a difference. Thier doctor told me that she has had cases where children who have been vaxed for it are coming down with it so I don't know....I'm more confused now than ever.

What really pisses me off about the whole thing is the fact that people are bringing their kids to church who have it, and are sending their kids to the parish school. What the hell? It pisses me off they are helping to spread it around like that. Am I wrong in this thinking?

i know this is off-topic but the vaxed kids that get it are more likely to have a mild case of it.

also, i totally don't think you are wrong in thinking that kids sick with it should stay home. the only problem is that it lasts a really long time so it's be hard for them to stay home until it's over. i'm not sure how long it's contagious for but i know that the symptoms can last over a month.

[ema-adama]

Originally Posted by momo7

What really pisses me off about the whole thing is the fact that people are bringing their kids to church who have it, and are sending their kids to the parish school. What the hell? It pisses me off they are helping to spread it around like that. Am I wrong in this thinking?

No.

It is irresponsible to bring sick children into public.

http://www.vaccineinformation.org/pertuss/qandadis.asp

How long is a person with pertussis contagious?
Persons with pertussis are most infectious during the catarrhal period and during the first two weeks after onset of the cough (approximately 21 days).

But yes, there are problems with the vaccine in that the vaccine fails for some people and does not prevents transmission.

Read up in the archives here how families have treated purtussis.

[carriebft]

*edited because post I was referring to was edited*


My assertion on "better" immunity comes from looking at the trials for these vaccines vs what I can find of the singles (or what is on their package inserts). Also looking at these I see that some have less reactions in their trials than the singles have. In addition, having older kids now, I see an added benefit for less pokes because it will go faster and there would definitely be less immediate pain.

As far as the "faster" part of immunity, I say that because of travel mostly. I had difficulty with each kid trying to decide which ones to go first, which to get in enough doses for immunity before leaving and some, like DTaP, are given earlier elsewhere as part of combos and immunity therefore develops earlier.

There are definite cons-- I just didn't think I really had to get into it since I was just posting my opinion and my thoughts for any future children and explaining why I might go from a pretty delayed to a more on time schedule.

I'm not going to lie: I was a lot more anti-vax when I started looking into things and have since become more towards the pro side. I hope it has never come off as if I have tried to hide that fact. It's just how it happened with and our family. I know plenty of people go the opposite way we have for their own families.

Thank you for the kind words everyone. And I am definitely not 100% made up on the issue, I just see some benefits to it.


ETA: Ruthla-- just wanted to note that I have extensively looked/am still ooking into this. Pediarix, for example, has been shown to provide better immunity numbers than the singles, even in a trial vs the singles, for the diseases we really care a lot about having immunity for. D, T and P numbers were also better vs infanrix. hib immunity numbers were better when given with pediarix vs the singles (not true with PCV though). The downside for us in the inclusion of Hep B, whereas we haven't thought to add that to our schedule until school time or later. Also, if PCV given at the same time seems to be affected, but we would not give PCV on the same day as pediarix (and we don't even do that one right now anyway so it's kinda a moot point)

Hexavac is criticized for not creating good Hep B immunity, yet seems to have good numbers on the rest and includes hib-- this could work for us but, from what I know, it is not available here yet.

just one small example of how I have been looking closely at this issue.

[emma1325]

Originally Posted by carriebft

My assertion on "better" immunity comes from looking at the trials for these vaccines vs what I can find of the singles (or what is on their package inserts). Also looking at these I see that some have less reactions in their trials than the singles have. In addition, having older kids now, I see an added benefit for less pokes because it will go faster and there would definitely be less immediate pain.

Just out of curiosity, how is this "better immunity" confirmed? Through titer testing, or observation of the subjects?

[emma1325]

Originally Posted by momo7

No I don't vax...but now I am wondering if I should have. There has been an outbreak of Pertussis (whooping Cough) in my community and my children have been exposed to it and now we are fighting it off. I keep wondering if I had vaxed them would it have made a difference. Thier doctor told me that she has had cases where children who have been vaxed for it are coming down with it so I don't know....I'm more confused now than ever.

What really pisses me off about the whole thing is the fact that people are bringing their kids to church who have it, and are sending their kids to the parish school. What the hell? It pisses me off they are helping to spread it around like that. Am I wrong in this thinking?

Don't worry...if you had vaccinated for pertussis your children most likely would have been misdiagnosed with bronchitis. I'm a little surprised that your doctor said some vax'ed kids have come down with WC, because I think doctors are reluctant to test for WC if the child has been vaccinated.

WC is not fun, but is treatable in otherwise healthy children.

[emma1325]

To those who said they would never, ever vaccinate (quite a few, I noticed,) how do you feel about the rabies vaccine in the case that you or a family member were potentially (or probably) exposed to rabies?

At this point, from what I've learned, the rabies vaccine is one that I'm so glad we have and I would use it if I felt the risk of rabies was there.

Also, what about tetanus immunoglobulin? I know it isn't really a vaccine, but it's along the same lines. Would you consider it if your child was at risk for tetanus? (I'm thinking I would.)

I picked the second option in the poll. And sorry I forgot to put an "other" option...I honestly thought I covered just about every possible answer!!! lol

[carriebft]

depends on the vaccine and how deep you look. If you just look at the package inserts, then they all show titres. If you look at clincicaltrials.gov and on google scholar you can find higher phase and bigger studies that are observational and look to see, for example, pertussis numbers in the group given singles v the group given the larger combo.