or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › How to talk your patient into vaccinating...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

How to talk your patient into vaccinating... - Page 4

post #61 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Otto View Post
And, this being a principled position, noone who eschewed prevention would mind bearing the full cost of treatment, right?

Perhaps if big pharma would consider taking on the costs of (and admitting) the damage they've caused?????

post #62 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fyrestorm View Post
Perhaps if big pharma would consider taking on the costs of (and admitting) the damage they've caused?????
Yah, that's an expectable response, but I was thinking more about insurance proper. Let me try narrowing it down so as to avoid a debate about the issues surrounding the Vaccine Court: If, on a purely actuarial basis, an insurer determined that writing a policy for someone who "preferred treatment over prevention" warranted a higher premium, would you object?
post #63 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Otto View Post
Yah, that's an expectable response, but I was thinking more about insurance proper. Let me try narrowing it down so as to avoid a debate about the issues surrounding the Vaccine Court: If, on a purely actuarial basis, an insurer determined that writing a policy for someone who "preferred treatment over prevention" warranted a higher premium, would you object?
Depends on whether the prevention is proven or not...should a smoker pay a higher premium? Yes, should someone who exercises and takes proper supplements and has a good diet pay lower premiums? Yes.

Vaccines? No proof - no change in premium

If the prevention is worse than the disease and if dealing with the side effects of the prevention cost lives and amounts of cash that put the costs of treating the disease to shame than people who choose the prevention should pay higher premiums...they already pay a tax on each vaccine anyway to pay for damages.
post #64 of 75
[QUOTE=Marnica;15810691]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Delicateflower View Post
I've never had doctors or nurses be condescending to me. If you approach them with respect for their education and expertise and show them that you understand immunology, statistics and biology they're always very willing to discuss things with you, in my experience.
QUOTE]

Have you ever told them you are not vaccinating your child? Soemthing tells me no...try it sometime and see how you are treated.
Yes, many times both various peds and ER docs as well. We delayed several and didn't give one at all. They always ask why and are understand my reasons.
post #65 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by WifeofAnt View Post
And that would be... 2,500,000 mcg of aluminum (give or take depending on the vaccine). Does anyone remember what the toxic threshold for a 6 lb baby is? Oh yeah, 11 mcg. I'm sure 3.2 BILLION times the TOXIC level of aluminum given at once would be absolutely fine. After all, just the Hep B vaccine is already 20 times the toxic dose!

(end sarcasm)
I TOTALLY agree with the logic. But just for the sake of accuracy: 2,500,000 devided 11 = 227'272.7.
post #66 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Otto View Post
Yah, that's an expectable response, but I was thinking more about insurance proper. Let me try narrowing it down so as to avoid a debate about the issues surrounding the Vaccine Court: If, on a purely actuarial basis, an insurer determined that writing a policy for someone who "preferred treatment over prevention" warranted a higher premium, would you object?
I would not be willing to pay a higher premium. Premium is an ongoing payment, and I should not have to pay constantly higher rates because I choose not to vaccinate.

However, it would be absolutely reasonable, IMO, to have a higher deductible. That, to me, is putting my money where my mouth is. I pay my deductible only if a claim is made. So, if due to not vaccinating myself or my family, we have more frequent or more serious illness, then I will have to pay more. And if, as I believe, we are in fact healthier and have fewer claims due to not vaccinating, we will not have to pay that deductible as often.

But then, I think that deductible should be higher all around Because I believe heavily vaccinated people will in fact be sick MORE often, not less, and therefore make more claims against their insurance.
post #67 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Delicateflower View Post
I've never had doctors or nurses be condescending to me. If you approach them with respect for their education and expertise and show them that you understand immunology, statistics and biology they're always very willing to discuss things with you, in my experience.

Ema, have you read the reports, plans and assessments of these programs? Those problems are not ignored. The whole program is designed around minimising or eliminating them (along with the problems of refrigeration). I don't think we're having a problem communicating, you've explained yourself and your priorities very clearly, I think.
That one really depends on the doctor and their agenda. The primary physician we had for the kids when they were little was awesome. We had a mutually respectful relationship, and he was always willing to listen to and discuss our concerns and research. We temporarily transferred to a doctor closer to home, and our experience was completely different. While dd was being seen for a nasty bug bite on her back, they tried to push us to give her vaccines. We politely declined. The visit ended with the Dr. literally screaming at us "If you don't get your children vaccinated for chickenpox, they'll die, die, DIE from it and it will be your fault!". So while many doctors out there ARE willing to have rational, intelligent discussions on the issue, there are certainly those who won't!
post #68 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yulia_R View Post
I TOTALLY agree with the logic. But just for the sake of accuracy: 2,500,000 devided 11 = 227'272.7.
Hmm... where did I get the other numbers? I should really start writing down everything I think.

The CDC recommended 2 month shots have 1,225 mcg of aluminum in 4 vaccines. Assuming the average 2 month old is 12 lbs their upper limit for aluminum would be 22 to 27.5 mcg per day. Those 2 month old shots (just the standard ones, not the imaginary 1000 shots at one time) would then be approximately 44.5 to 55.7 times the 'safe' amount.
post #69 of 75
[QUOTE=Delicateflower;15811842]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marnica View Post

Yes, many times both various peds and ER docs as well. We delayed several and didn't give one at all. They always ask why and are understand my reasons.
Sorry but this is NOT the same thing as not vaccinating and the reponses between delaying a few and passing on 1 will be nowhere near those of what non-vaxing moms get. Ive been fortunate in that the first doc I had was not rude or mean or bullying. She made it clear she thought I was wrong and (and attempting to have rational, well-researched conversations with her was pretty pointless) and I ended up leaving because I did not agree with some of their office policies or hoops that non-vaxing families need to jump through. I know from reading plenty of horror stories that this unfortunately is not the norm and many parents are treated poorly for their choices.
post #70 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by LivingSky View Post

But then, I think that deductible should be higher all around Because I believe heavily vaccinated people will in fact be sick MORE often, not less, and therefore make more claims against their insurance.

Interesting thought...I have never made an insurance claim for my DD (except for the eye doctor - but I don't think anyone would imagine that her lazy eye is in any way caused by lack of vaccines). Other than they eye doctor, my insurance company hasn't paid one single penny for my DD....ever. I know her fellow first grade students can't say the same
post #71 of 75
You cant charge people more because they choose not to vaccinate. Then you would have to look at lifestyle as a whole too.

Eat Fast food more than once a week? Your premium should go up
Formula Feed? same
Overweight? Same
Dont exercise? Same

I dont actually agree with that.

Since most(not all, so spare me your anecdotes) people I know who dont vaccinate also eat whole foods, exercise, and breasfeed, not vaccinating balances out in the end for long term health IMO. Its because of my choices that my DD has only been to the doctor once in her 2.5 years for something other than a check up. That was a bladder infection and in no way related to vaccines.
post #72 of 75

Hmm

I don't think the ham sandwich analogy is condescending, and I think it's apt. When they put together such pamphlets, they have to make the material understandable to everyone. The idea of false assumptions as to causation, based on proximity, couldn't be much more simply explained IMHO. They had to choose two things completely unrelated (cars and sandwiches) to get the idea across.
post #73 of 75

The difference is, the sandwich is NOT deadly.

post #74 of 75

44.5 to 55.7 times the 'safe' amount is definitely not safe then.

post #75 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by WifeofAnt View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yulia_R View Post
I TOTALLY agree with the logic. But just for the sake of accuracy: 2,500,000 devided 11 = 227'272.7.
Hmm... where did I get the other numbers? I should really start writing down everything I think.

The CDC recommended 2 month shots have 1,225 mcg of aluminum in 4 vaccines. Assuming the average 2 month old is 12 lbs their upper limit for aluminum would be 22 to 27.5 mcg per day. Those 2 month old shots (just the standard ones, not the imaginary 1000 shots at one time) would then be approximately 44.5 to 55.7 times the 'safe' amount.

44.5 to 55.7 times the 'safe' amount is definitely not safe then

 

 
 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Vaccinations
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › How to talk your patient into vaccinating...