Polio - to vax or not?

[mcgee]

Our son is almost 5 months old and is completely unvaccinated. I am comfortable with this, knowing that we can vaccinate later if we choose to do so, but my husband is apprehensive about polio and would like to have him vaccinated for that sooner rather than later. Can anyone point me in the direction of some good articles and studies on polio and the polio vaccine? Many thanks in advance.

[womenswisdom]

Check out The Vaccine Book by Dr. Sears, which has the little tidbit that there hasn't been a case of non-vaccine-caused polio in this country in over 30 years. Maybe that'll ease his mind on that one.

[Marnica]

Originally Posted by mcgee

Our son is almost 5 months old and is completely unvaccinated. I am comfortable with this, knowing that we can vaccinate later if we choose to do so, but my husband is apprehensive about polio and would like to have him vaccinated for that sooner rather than later. Can anyone point me in the direction of some good articles and studies on polio and the polio vaccine? Many thanks in advance.

Of all the VPD's to be concerned about he worries about polio?? Unless you are living in Nigeria or India perhaps, I really wouldn't worry about it. No Polio here is 3 decades. Have him read the CDC pinkbook chapter on polio as well.

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pin...oads/polio.pdf

does he know that 95% of all polio infections are asymptomatic? or that 4-8% present as a bug, kind of like the flu or common cold? or 1-5% of infections present with stiffness that lats about a week with complete recovery? and that less than 1% of infections result in any kind or paralysis??

[mamakah]

Thanks for posting the pink book Marnica! I just read something that I must have somehow missed the first time I read it, and it kind of freaked me out:

"Before the 18th century, polioviruses probably circulated widely. Initial infections with at least one type probably occurred in early infancy, when transplacentally acquired maternal antibodies were high. Exposure throughout life probably provided continual boosting of immunity, and paralytic infections were probably rare. (This view has been recently challenged based on data from lameness studies in developing countries.)"

*What worries me about this paragraph is that it's basically saying that children were exposed at a young age, and their bodies built some immunity, possibly being the reason why paralysis is so rare. My son is completely unvaxed, and I've always trusted his immune system and the fact that Polio is not serious in 95% of cases. What are your thoughts on this? It worries me that Polio would be more serious if my child caught it now, simply because he's never ever been exposed to it before. They say the view has been "challenged" but not refuted... followed by talk that this theory might explain why the 1952 outbreak was so high. I'd love to hear everyones thoughts!
p.s. Not trying to hijack thread! but this should be a great discussion to help OP make a decision!

[Marnica]

Originally Posted by mamakah

Thanks for posting the pink book Marnica! I just read something that I must have somehow missed the first time I read it, and it kind of freaked me out:

"Before the 18th century, polioviruses probably circulated widely. Initial infections with at least one type probably occurred in early infancy, when transplacentally acquired maternal antibodies were high. Exposure throughout life probably provided continual boosting of immunity, and paralytic infections were probably rare. (This view has been recently challenged based on data from lameness studies in developing countries.)"

*What worries me about this paragraph is that it's basically saying that children were exposed at a young age, and their bodies built some immunity, possibly being the reason why paralysis is so rare. My son is completely unvaxed, and I've always trusted his immune system and the fact that Polio is not serious in 95% of cases. What are your thoughts on this? It worries me that Polio would be more serious if my child caught it now, simply because he's never ever been exposed to it before. They say the view has been "challenged" but not refuted... followed by talk that this theory might explain why the 1952 outbreak was so high. I'd love to hear everyones thoughts!
p.s. Not trying to hijack thread! but this should be a great discussion to help OP make a decision!

The same could be said for many of the VPD's (measles, mumps rubella, CP)....The vaccines have made the diseases more serious because there is far less wild viruses circulating. As for Polio, I would only consider this vax if I was travelling to a area of the world where it was endemic. I also have some different views in regards to polio and what may have caused the "outbreaks" in the 50's, but that is a whole other thread .

[blessedwithboys]

everyone seems to have a pet vax. for my exdh, it was smallpox. LOL hey, it was 9-11, he was scared of terrorists...i forgave him for that one.

the point is, your LO is about as likely to get polio as he is to get smallpox. tell your dh to do his homework and relax.

[Voodoo Lady]

I am also having problems deciding what to do. My husband and I travel a lot for archaeology, and I knew a girl in Italy about 10 years ago, who was in her early 20's and was confined to a wheelchair for complications from polio that she'd had as a child. I don't want to do any unnecessary vaccines, but I can't get that girl out of my mind.

[Tattooed Hand]

we will be getting the polio vax but only after dd is 2 and only because we will be traveling to Asia on a regular basis.