I'm pro-science too and I still don't vaccinate. Luckily, I am able to differentiate between facts and opinions and understand how to weigh benefits versus risks. Amazingly enough I still come to the same conclusion every time.
i definitely vaccinate. we were slightly delayed, because i was hearing a lot of people saying they weren't vaccinating - people whose other parenting decisions i very much respected, so i was convinced that there must be some strong evidence to support not vaccinating our children. i dutifully read all the research these people were pointing me to, and i literally couldn't find anything that was conclusive enough to make me not want to vaccinate. so at 6 months i started my dd on the regular course of shots (we're in canada too, so a different schedule)... we are still not quite caught up, but our wonderful ped has been very relaxed about it.
i am actually quite embarrassed that i was so easily swayed by a handful of people. i grew up in a third world country too, where the reality of a largely non-vaccinated population is right in front of you all the time.
Is it b/c they aren't vaccinated or b/c is un or under developed? NAK
We vaccinate. The research provided by the anti-vaccination side is highly suspect and/or interpreted poorly.
Vaxing does not equate to allowing them to live the healthiest life possible.
The diseases vaccines are available for are generally rare, benign, or not very effective.
Vaccination may have contributed to diseases being rare. Indeed, you can vaccinate as a way to support herd immunity.
I would not go into vaxxing thinking it was going to protect my individual child and make them healthier - because they question is : protect them from what???
DPT - D and T are very rare, for P the vaccines is quite ineffective.
MMR - all 3 are benign-ish in children. Measles may be the exception.
HIB (ok - not sure - must look up, lol)
You may consider them benign. I don't. During my residency, we had an excellent ASL translator at our clinic. Because of this, we had a huge amount of Deaf patients. Very few were deaf from birth. Most were deaf from your "benign" diseases, HiB especially. I also had several patients with congenital rubella syndrome. Blind (from congenital cataracts), deaf and developmentally disabled. Yup, sounds like a walk in the park!
Thanks, I'll keep vaccinating.
We're pro-science, and we don't vaccinate. Scientifically, vaccines have never been proven to be safe. The reporting system is about as anti-science as you can get...passive, under-reported...therefore, there are no accurate numbers to base a true risk vs. benefit analysis off of. Defaulting to the biological norm in the absence of verifiable evidence of safety (and without an increased risk of catching or having complications from disease) is not anti-science...it is common sense.
You can't put a claim on pro-vaccine as pro-science when science doesn't truly support the current vaccine program, and never has.
I love when someone else types everything I would say, but nicer. I'd still get my kids fully vaccinated even if we didn't travel overseas, but the travel seals it for us.
You may consider them benign. I don't. During my residency, we had an excellent ASL translator at our clinic. Because of this, we had a huge amount of Deaf patients. Very few were deaf from birth. Most were deaf from your "benign" diseases, HiB especially. I also had several patients with congenital rubella syndrome. Blind (from congenital cataracts), deaf and developmentally disabled. Yup, sounds like a walk in the park!
Thanks, I'll keep vaccinating.
I am not trying to talk you out of vaccinating. Do as you like.
The stats are pretty clear, though - benign diseases are just that - benign for the majority of the population.
I suspect that what you have seen would influence your decision - it is natural. It does not change the fact that rubella and mumps in childhood are benign for the vast majority of people where I live.....
There were 9 cases of Rubella in the USA in a recent year.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/story/2005/03/21/rubella-stats050321.html
So...you may have seen people with congenital rubella from the past, but it is unlikely you are seeing any babies now with it. So - this is an argument for herd immunity, if you like, but it is hardly an argument for keeping your individual child healthy - because the likelihood of your child contacting rubella is really, really low - and the likelihood of them having any issues due to rubella is low. I have not done the math but (unless you travel a fair bit) I bet your child is more likely to find to find a million dollar lottery ticket on the street than be harmed by rubella.
We don't vaccinate, because the documented, known risks of vaccines range from mild to very serious, and the true extent of these risks remain unknown due to a very inadequate reporting system. Also, there has never been research done on 1) long-term risks of vaccines 2) individual susceptibility or 3) individual vaccine ingredients.
There are neurotoxic ingredients in vaccines, which my daughter reacted to and still has problems from seven years after getting that particular set of infant shots. She has been diagnosed as having heavy metal toxicity (not shocking since there are heavy metals in the vaccines) and as a result suffers from severe mineral deficiencies despite a near perfect diet. After supplementing her with mega doses of certain minerals, she has shown dramatic improvement but still has a ways to go.
We would never vaccinate our children without a clear and direct risk factor in place. Simply being a child does not meet that criteria. My five year old is completely vaccine free, and the healthiest child I know. My oldest is healthy too, besides the neurological issues she deals with as a result of our carelessly agreeing to allow vaccines injected into her tiny body while her neurological system was still rapidly developing.
I'm pro-science. We vax.
I am revisiting this statement because it has been bugging me.
I do not know if you are implying that non-vaxers are not scientific - although I assume you are, or else why else post this?
It you are saying non-vaxxers are unscientific it seems to be quite a generalization.
I breastfed through difficulty because it was scientifically better for the baby and I, I read up on nutrition and have increased certain foods while decreasing others because if is scientifically proven blueberries are better than blueberry doughnuts....
I have come to a different conclusion than you on vaccines - that does not make me "not scientific".
We vax. I have to admit reading the vax forums here is a pretty big part of the reason why I decided vaxing was best for us. Anti-vax rhetoric just seems to be that, rhetoric and not based on much actual science.
We're selective. For a while, I was anti...I now feel like I was living in fear of an incredibly rare chance of a severe vaccine reaction that didn't hold up numbers-wise to the actual risks of certain diseases. Taking both morbidity and mortality into consideration. And just anecdotally, seeing all of my friends and family with their tons of kids all vaxed fully on schedule, perfectly healthy and developing beautifully helped a lot.
We're pro-science and pro-evidence based medicine and we do vaccinate. We spread them out and do them one at a time, but we certainly do them. We travel regularly as a family and believe that it would be immoral to expose our daughter to VPDs and to spread them to others.
..
Yes. I think they are ruled by a desire to do what they think is best for their kid, but they are not able to differentiate between objective facts and opinions, and they don't know how to weigh risks. They are lulled into a false sense of security about VPDs because these diseases have been well managed during their lifetime.
I don't really blame them - there is a lot of very convincing misinformation out there.
But their decisions are not science-based.
We started out on a delay schedule but we no longer vax. We will revisit the issue again at some point to decide if we want to continue not vaxing or if we want to start vaxing for one or more VPDs. for now, I am happy with our choice.
I am naturally-minded and have decided, for myself, that I will not be vaccinating my child.
I am pro-science and anti-capitalist. I do not believe that most of the pro-vax medical studies out there weren't made without the economic incentives from the companies that make the products. I have done a lot of research as to the politics of drug-pedaling in our country, and I don't think it's the physicians are at fault - I think it's corporate interests. I am not a conspiracy-theorist (I do, in fact, resent that implication and find it ignorant and patronizing). I am a well-educated person who is not naive to the way lobbying and drug-distribution works. I have been offered many prescriptions by presumably well-meaning physicians, two of which have almost killed me. These were very popular drugs that were gaining a lot of profit off of children and booming in distribution when I was offered them in my youth. I no longer take synthetic drugs and my supposedly incurable "ailments" are null. I'm not saying that drugs aren't sometimes necessary, but it certainly isn't necessary to inject EVERYONE with them from birth and in early childhood! I am pro-science and science is science - even political science. 
I'm with Crunchy_Mommy. I have not been convinced, even by well-financed studies pushed by very powerful drug companies, that immunizations actually carry more benefits than risks, overall. And, where a child lives day-to-day in a healthy environment, I strongly believe the opposite.
I am revisiting this statement because it has been bugging me.
I do not know if you are implying that non-vaxers are not scientific - although I assume you are, or else why else post this?
It you are saying non-vaxxers are unscientific it seems to be quite a generalization.
I breastfed through difficulty because it was scientifically better for the baby and I, I read up on nutrition and have increased certain foods while decreasing others because if is scientifically proven blueberries are better than blueberry doughnuts....
I have come to a different conclusion than you on vaccines - that does not make me "not scientific".
This. Exactly. That statement has bothered me for a day now and you said it perfectly. :)
I think that implying that the only decision that is science based is to follow the CDC schedule is inherently problematic. The ingredients in vaccines like Al and Hg, the combination of vaccines (receiving MMR with other vaccines) as well as the schedule itself have just not been studied. There is no science to conclude that the one size fits all schedules are safe and effective for every child.
I looked into the claims being made by various antivaccine 'activisits' and came to the conclusion that there is no compelling evidence that vaccines are causing harm in all but the most unusual cases. However, there is cause for concern. And the medical/scientific establishment seems to be doing what they can to dismiss the concerns as lunatic rather than address them.
I was also left with the impression that vaccines are very much a 'work in progress' and there is a huge amount still to be understood regarding the immune system, how best to use vaccines safely and effectively and more understanding is needed regarding the ecology of bacteria and viruses. And the impact vaccines can have on that ecology.
I did look at the pro/anti material,but my real focus was just the information on the vaccine inserts. I wanted to understand the pros and cons of each vaccine,and I wanted to know how each of the *acknowledged* adverse reactions my child might deal with are treated.
I was disappointed with how reactions are handled. I was(am) also disappointed by the NVICP,because it gives a VERY false sense of security. It would seem like you just call the 1-800 number,and all your medical worries will be taken care of. Many learn after the fact that the compensation program will not help them.Shoot,most times doctors will just deny the health issues following a vaccine.It really is quite easy to deny that a vaccine caused a health problem.
Reactions,injuries,and death may be rare,but when they happen they should be dealt with not denied. If the negatives of vaccines were handled better I might consider vaccines.
Follow Mothering