Change of Heart - please read

[berkeleyp]

So I've always been wary of vaxes. Reluctantly i agreed to have dd1 mostly vax'd - she skipped HepB, MMR, Varicella and maybe HiB though i can't quite remember. Her last vax was at 18 months I think.

I did more reading and followed my gut and didn't get dd2 vaxed at all - that is until last night.

We skipped all infant vaxes and I thought I would re-look at the Tetanus vax when she got older. Oddly enough, I was just researching about this and other vaxes again to see if I might reconsider now that she was 2, when she got a puncture wound on her foot on Sunday night. It wasn't bad, wasn't caused by a rusty nail, but I was still worried. I went into panic mode last evening (Monday) and started reading about Tetanus and how horrible it is and how it is everywhere and I really started freaking out.

Sooo, I called the doctor and explained she had this minor puncture - caused by a holly leaf (you may laugh but they are very sharp) and that she was never vaxed and he sternly told me to go directly to the ER to get the vax.

I realized that if my baby contracted Tetanus because I didn't vax her for it, I would not forgive myself. Tetanus is very dangerous with somewhere between a 10 and 20% death rate in recent years in the US.

I brought her in and she received the a tetanus/diptheria shot as well as tetanus immune-globulin to provide passive immunity in the next few weeks to hopefully prevent an infection from the current wound.

Now I know that she probably wouldn't get tetanus anyway because even though it is everywhere, you don't just get it from any cut or wound and I know that even at 18% fatality, odds are she would be fine but I realized that I had made my anti-vax decision based more on fear than on science.

I read lots of stuff here and also read several anti-vax books and articles online. I tried to dig through all the technical info to get a science based answer to my questions but all I got was frustration with the lack of good information and the obvious bias on all sides. I liked the Dr. Sears book but had to put down one by Neil Z. Miller after a section where he obviously misinterpreted some data - one obvious error and I questioned his entire body of research and his conclusions -call me crazy.

Anyway, I am writing here because I wanted to share my fear and anxiety about the possibility that my daughter would get tetanus because I didn't vax her. I hope that anyone reading this who is choosing an alternate vax route consider how they would feel when faced with the real risks of each disease in question. I think we aren't very afraid of a lot of diseases because we don't see them (because most people are vaxed) and so it is easy to believe that our children are not really at risk for the disease but may be at risk for vax complications.

Also, here are a few articles of interest from the other side- I didn't base my opinion on them alone but reading a little on both sides is important:

http://www.newsweek.com/2008/10/24/s...minefield.html

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/...achildmultiple

http://www.scienceforsale.com/2010/0...sentative.html

[chaoticzenmom]

It seems to me like you based your decision to vaccinate her based on fear. You logically knew that a holly leaf was not going to give her tetanus, but you vaccinated her because you were afraid it would? Your dr. played on your fear to increase his vaccination stats. He should have reassured you that children with good blood circulation will not get tetanus from a holly leaf puncture. The emergency room? I'm really shocked by that. I'm angry for you that you and your child were put through that.

[ammiga]

I'm so sorry that you went through such trauma over this issue.

I think the real key is coming to terms with what the risks are, regardless of which option you choose, so that when faced with a time when you might panic, you feel reassured by your choices and aren't forced to make a decision out of fear.

My dd has had several small puncture wounds, was diagnosed with mumps (misdiagnosed, but I didn't learn that for weeks), and has been exposed to countless VADs and other illnesses. I have been in many situations where dd was really exposed to diseases, and felt comforted by the fact that she was not vaxed and held firm with my belief that, yes, she might get sick, but that she would also get better.

We all need to determine which studies we determine to be science and which studies we determine to be fear-mongering. This is an issue where many people draw a different line.

I hope that you have found peace with your choices, and that your children are all doing well.

[chaoticzenmom]

Ok, looking through your articles. Lets start with the first one. Paul Offit? He's a patent holder for the roto-virus and the most sensationalist outspoken pro-vaccination person out there. He's the one that said that kids could have 1000 vaccinations at a time and be fine.

The second article is from the cdc. Did you take a look at who funds the cdc? Pharmaceuticals. It's gov't mixed with private business with no controls with regards to conflicts of interest. The new head of Merk's vaccination department is the former head of the cdc. She's making millions now...she was bought out a long time ago. I don't trust the cdc any more than Parenting magazine.

The third article is a blog about someone's fear of other people's unvaccinated kids. It says that there's no science supporting non-vaxxing parents? There's no accurate science either way. Read the thread here about suppressing dissent. Researchers are fearful of touching this subject and there has never been a study of vaccinated vs. non-vaccinated...ever. Did you know that pharmaceutical companies are paying professors in large colleges (even harvard) to push their products. They're even writing textbooks for some. They also pay for "research." and pull funding if it looks like things aren't going to go their way. They've been caught faking studies as well.

You didn't need these articles to have a change of heart. If you were truly pulled towards vaccination based on your gut, that's perfectly understandable. These articles are nothing new though.

[sapientia]

Originally Posted by chaoticzenmom

It seems to me like you based your decision to vaccinate her based on fear. You logically knew that a holly leaf was not going to give her tetanus, but you vaccinated her because you were afraid it would? Your dr. played on your fear to increase his vaccination stats. He should have reassured you that children with good blood circulation will not get tetanus from a holly leaf puncture. The emergency room? I'm really shocked by that. I'm angry for you that you and your child were put through that.

I have to agree entirely with this. It seems both decisions were based on fear-to vax and not to vax.
The point is to be educated on both sides and understand what is information designed to inspire fear (look at who is funding the research, for instance) and what information is just based on fact.

[Ruthla]

I just want to remind you that you don't "have to" continue on with the series of DTaP (do they give TD to kids? you probably got the DTaP) vaccines you just started. The ped will want to give her several more of the same thing, about 2 months apart. You can't undo the shot she's already had, but you can stop at this point and not give any more.

Spend the next several months doing research. Research the potential dangers from the vaccines. Research the potential dangers from the illnesses, and also how to treat them if they are contracted. See if you can find any information anywhere on how much protection she got from being partially vaxed- just because the peds recomend 3-4 doses does NOT automatically mean that your child actually needs that many to minimize her chances of contracting those specific diseases.

Keep in mind that the vaccine dangers are probably reduced just by delaying this long: the toxins are more diluted and she has a stronger liver than a 2mo, making her more capable of dealing with vaccine toxins than a 2mo baby would. Plus you didn't give her numerous vaccines at once, just the DT(aP).

It's perfectly OK if you decide to completely vax her, and have her "all caught up" by the time she's 3. It's OK if you decide not to give her any more vaxes at all, ever. It's OK if you decide something in the middle; say continue with the DTaP but not give any others. But whatever you decide, make it a decision based on research, not fear.

[VillageMom6]

Yes, the OP may have made a decision based on fear but how many of us mamas never fear for the well-being of our children?

I've done the same thing. I had an unvaccinated toddler cut her thumb (deeply) on a tin lid. She needed stitches and the ER recommended the tetanus vaccine. I agreed because I was afraid of her getting tetanus. It does happen and vaccines sometimes do work.

Deciding to vax or not can feel like a gamble. Neither "side" can say with 100% certainty that their position is the absolute, ultimate correct one. We make the best decisions we can at the time based on the information that we have and the circumstances that are unique to our particular child.

I had decided not to vaccinate against chicken pox unless my children reached 12 or so and had not come down with it naturally. Well, the oldest reached 12... never had it... and one day all of my children were exposed.

I was afraid of spending the next three months dealing with increasingly sick children and missing out on all of the holiday events we were anticipating. So I got them vaccinated that day and they never came down with it.

Am I 100% confident in my decision? Well, no. Do I regret it? No to that, too.

This past winter I watched a friend struggle with pertussis running through her family. It may not have been deadly, but it was a nightmare. I didn't want my unvaccinated toddler to come down with pertussis. It was going through my community, so I made a fear-based decision to get him a DTaP.

He did not get pertussis. Was it thanks to the vaccine? Will there be a negative effect from the vaccine? I can't know any of that for sure. That is sooo frustrating and why I can't blame any mama for making the decision that she feels is best at the time.

[heathergirl67]

OP: I agree that the threat of the diseases looks very different when they're presented as an actual, current possibility to your child. I'm glad you made a decision that you're comfortable with and I hope your kiddo thrives.

Originally Posted by chaoticzenmom

The second article is from the cdc. Did you take a look at who funds the cdc? Pharmaceuticals. It's gov't mixed with private business with no controls with regards to conflicts of interest. The new head of Merk's vaccination department is the former head of the cdc. She's making millions now...she was bought out a long time ago. I don't trust the cdc any more than Parenting magazine.

I have a question that's a little bit OT. Who do you trust? I mean that in a totally genuine, non-snarky way. To be frank, I haven't found one study that's not potentially influenced by some outside factor. That's why I trust studies that are reproducable. How do you determine what studies can be trusted?

[serenbat]

I brought her in and she received the a tetanus/diptheria shot as well as tetanus immune-globulin to provide passive immunity in the next few weeks to hopefully prevent an infection from the current wound.

Wondered if you questioned the Dr as to why both?

if you and the Dr. felt the vaccine gives immunity why than do both?

Did your Dr. talk to you about the effects on the body of giving both?

Why (I assume your Dr. told you) didn't your Dr. just give immune-globulin alone and why not wait to give the DTP shot at the follow-up visit? assuming since you were given both your dr would want a follow up visit

[mamadelbosque]

Meh. DS1 is 3. Ds2 is 11 months. We live out in the middle of nowhere, have goats, formerly had chickens & ducks, dogs & cats and all sorts of wild critters roaming around. DS1 plays outside barefoot and occasionally gets small "puncture wounds" in his feet, as do I. Tetanus is just not something I worry about. If he ever has an wound thats *ACTUALLY* at risk of tetanus (ie a *VERY* deep puncture or crushing wound or something), we'll go get the TIG. We won't get the DTaP. The DTaP was worthless to your DD at the time - the TIG was worthwhile. If your now convinced to do the DTaP series then I suppose it was worthwhile, but if not, then you just threw money down a hole. The DTaP can *NOT* prevent your DD from contracting tetanus from a wound that she has already received. Only the TIG can do that.

[sapientia]

Originally Posted by mamadelbosque

Meh. DS1 is 3. Ds2 is 11 months. We live out in the middle of nowhere, have goats, formerly had chickens & ducks, dogs & cats and all sorts of wild critters roaming around. DS1 plays outside barefoot and occasionally gets small "puncture wounds" in his feet, as do I. Tetanus is just not something I worry about. If he ever has an wound thats *ACTUALLY* at risk of tetanus (ie a *VERY* deep puncture or crushing wound or something), we'll go get the TIG. We won't get the DTaP. The DTaP was worthless to your DD at the time - the TIG was worthwhile. If your now convinced to do the DTaP series then I suppose it was worthwhile, but if not, then you just threw money down a hole. The DTaP can *NOT* prevent your DD from contracting tetanus from a wound that she has already received. Only the TIG can do that.

Same here-my completely non vaxed kids do spend a lot of time out in the country around farm critters and I just make sure they keep shoes on (for the most part) clean any punctures and I resolved a long time ago that if there was any question I would get the TIG, you're right the DTaP is worthless after the fact.

[LoisLane]

Just sending a hug to the OP and letting you know I get what you are saying. I was fine when my kids got chicken pox. Kind of glad they got it. But when my mostly unvaxxed girls were exposed to measles in their preschool, and I had to watch and wait those 21 days to see what happened (days in which I read a LOT about measles and its many (rare but real) complications), I felt that my `delayed vaxxing` position was a LOT more stressful. It was harder to walk the walk when staring down the very real threat of a disease that, yes, in most kids is fine but in some kids causes death.

They didn`t get measles in the end... and I am now rethinking the MMR. FWIW.

[Marnica]

Originally Posted by LoisLane

Just sending a hug to the OP and letting you know I get what you are saying. I was fine when my kids got chicken pox. Kind of glad they got it. But when my mostly unvaxxed girls were exposed to measles in their preschool, and I had to watch and wait those 21 days to see what happened (days in which I read a LOT about measles and its many (rare but real) complications), I felt that my `delayed vaxxing` position was a LOT more stressful. It was harder to walk the walk when staring down the very real threat of a disease that, yes, in most kids is fine but in some kids causes death.

They didn`t get measles in the end... and I am now rethinking the MMR. FWIW.

Totally concur with this (except the rethinking mmr part )....it's easy to feel confident when all is well. Much harder when there is real a real threat of a disease. We all do the best we can all the time....nobody is judging. I think the overall message is don't make decisions out of fear. Hard to follow, but important advice.

[chaoticzenmom]

Originally Posted by heathergirl67

OP: I agree that the threat of the diseases looks very different when they're presented as an actual, current possibility to your child. I'm glad you made a decision that you're comfortable with and I hope your kiddo thrives.




I have a question that's a little bit OT. Who do you trust? I mean that in a totally genuine, non-snarky way. To be frank, I haven't found one study that's not potentially influenced by some outside factor. That's why I trust studies that are reproducable. How do you determine what studies can be trusted?

I trust my naturapathic dr. . I don't trust anyone with an incentive to push vaccines.

[Black Orchid]

I haven't vaxed my kids and my DH and I have skipped all of our adult boosters. This was after careful consideration and thought about all the pros and cons. I often consider what I would do if my kids were in a situation that they were exposed to a illness that is vax-preventable.

I sliced my finger on a metal fence last summer while building cages for my tomato plants. Not for a moment did I consider getting a tetanus shot. It just wasn't logical based on the circumstance. I wasn't afraid every moment, I didn't obsess, I just weighed the stats and realized it was more likely that I could be harmed by the vax in some way than have tetanus.

[Marnica]

Originally Posted by heathergirl67

OP: I agree that the threat of the diseases looks very different when they're presented as an actual, current possibility to your child. I'm glad you made a decision that you're comfortable with and I hope your kiddo thrives.




I have a question that's a little bit OT. Who do you trust? I mean that in a totally genuine, non-snarky way. To be frank, I haven't found one study that's not potentially influenced by some outside factor. That's why I trust studies that are reproducable. How do you determine what studies can be trusted?

Try reading Evidence of Harm by David Kirby. It is full of cited studies from independent researchers.

[heathergirl67]

Originally Posted by chaoticzenmom

I trust my naturapathic dr. . I don't trust anyone with an incentive to push vaccines.

So you don't trust any scientific studies? Why do you trust your naturapathic dr? Again, I promise I'm not trying to interrogate you! And please tell me it's none of my business if that's how you feel.

[heathergirl67]

Originally Posted by Marnica

Try reading Evidence of Harm by David Kirby. It is full of cited studies from independent researchers.

I think I will. Thanks for the recommendation!

[chaoticzenmom]

Originally Posted by heathergirl67

So you don't trust any scientific studies? Why do you trust your naturapathic dr? Again, I promise I'm not trying to interrogate you! And please tell me it's none of my business if that's how you feel.

Don't trust scientific studies? I didn't write that. Although, I guess you have to define scientific study. Who's paying for it? What happens with the study if it looks like it's going a certain way? When it comes to vaccines, there haven't been any "real" studies. They study efficacy of vaccines, but not long-term safety of them.

Do you have access to a study where the non-vaccinated child is used as the control subject? As far as I know, there are none.

Here are some studies http://www.14studies.org/studies.html still none comparing vaccinated children to non-vaccinated children.

[nia82]

It's a little OT, but in response to scientific studies... That means anything and nothing. Seriously, been there done that. You can totally skew results and data without being outside the realm of allowed statistical re-calculation. We all did it in studies to get at least significant results. It's the way it's done. And if you want to skew it into a direction that you want to, no problem. Anyone who's ever done a study and knows her way around statistics can tell you that. Being in science actually made it a lot less credible to me. As my statistics professor said, never trust a study you didn't manipulate yourself. It's sad, but true. Science is like a dogmatic religion to many people these days without recognizing that it is flawed and can make a lot of mistakes.