Early-life Infections, Immunizations May Alter Childhood Asthma Risk - Page 2

[stik]

Originally Posted by SilverMoon010 

Thanks for the suggestion but I actually was speaking of all children in general, not my own in particular.  I see all children as very special and deserving of time from doctors when it comes to their health and future.

I agree in re. children being special and deserving time from doctors.  My point is that for most children, individual risk-benefit analysis of the vaccination schedule is neither merited nor beneficial.  Their doctors should focus on their actual needs.  
 

[stik]

Originally Posted by Bokonon 

" food allergies, chronic illnesses, medical conditions suspected of having a genetic component"

"how healthy a child appears is a generally sound criteria for identifying a healthy child"

What my post said was that most doctors would take a family history regarding those issues.  This means they would interview the adult who brought the child to the doctors' office about whether those issues had occurred in the child's genetic relatives.  This does create difficulties for some families who may not have access to information on some or all of the child's genetic relatives, but in most families, family history is known and can be shared.  So yes, the family history can usually be made apparent.

And then, the doctor assesses how the child looks and sounds, and asks about eating, sleeping, elimination, and parent concerns.  If the kid looks healthy, in my experience, the kid is declared healthy.  I have never had a doctor say, "Well, everything looks great and your family history and reports of the child's behavior don't raise any cause for concern, but just to be certain that this kid ACTUALLY IS as healthy as we all think, lets run a chest x-ray, a spinal tap, and a panel of blood tests before administering routine prophylaxis for VPDs."  

But then, YMMV.  

[SilverMoon010]

Originally Posted by stik 

I agree in re. children being special and deserving time from doctors.  My point is that for most children, individual risk-benefit analysis of the vaccination schedule is neither merited nor beneficial.  Their doctors should focus on their actual needs.  
 

By this, when you say actual needs, you are referring to vaccines I assume.  The thing is not all children need all of the vaccines that are on the schedule.   If I would have listened to our doctor (and practically all doctors out there) I would have vaccinated our son for several diseases he never even became exposed to.  He is out of the so-called danger zone now for a few diseases, so no, those vaccines weren't his actual needs and I'm glad I didn't get them.

[stik]

Actually, I'm not referring to vaccines.  As you might have guessed, I vaccinate, but I don't think vaccines are the alpha and omega of pediatric care.  

[SilverMoon010]

Originally Posted by stik 

Actually, I'm not referring to vaccines.  As you might have guessed, I vaccinate, but I don't think vaccines are the alpha and omega of pediatric care.  

Ok, I'm sorry.   I thought that's what you were saying. My mistake.

[MyBoysBlue]

Originally Posted by stik  Yes, there can be a lot in one visit (though not 6-8 unless you've fallen behind on the schedule).

You don't have to be behind schedule to have 6-8 at a time.  The very first visit at 2 month has 7 different illness vaccinated against according to the Alberta schedule which is where I am from.  This doesn't even include Hep B which is on most schedules elsewhere.  Our schedule only has it at Grade 5.

[boomer78]

To my knowledge, 2+4 months of age are 7 vaxes  (Hib, Pc, DTaP, Rotavirus and Polio), or 8 at 2 months if HepB vax isn't given at 5 weeks or so,  plus Flu at 6 months of age.  12 and 18 months are 5 and 6.  And Fast forward to 5 years where a child may get 8 in one visit (DTaP, Polio, MMR, Chickenpox) plus maybe the Flu.   

[stik]

My bad - I was counting shots, not vaccines.  Even for the larger number of vaccines, the aggregate risk/benefit analysis has been done.  

[SilverMoon010]

Originally Posted by stik 

Even for the larger number of vaccines, the aggregate risk/benefit analysis has been done.  

It has? When? There are no studies supporting the safety of giving several vaccines at one time. Vaccines are administered simultaneously for convenience, not safety, because there are so many vaccines on the schedule that the number of visits to a healthcare provider for each of these shots individually would be a hindrance to everyone involved.  Therefore, the outcome is administering them all at one visit. 

[ammiga]

Originally Posted by stik 

I agree in re. children being special and deserving time from doctors.  My point is that for most children, individual risk-benefit analysis of the vaccination schedule is neither merited nor beneficial.  Their doctors should focus on their actual needs.  
 

How would a doctor focus on actual needs without getting to know the personal history and risks of children without taking time to go over the many details that may affect their needs? Many of the same questions can be asked that affect individual risks for VADs, feeding needs, sleep needs, overall health and development, etc.
 

[stik]

My kids' doctors took a family history and reviewed the patient care notes on my children since birth, and I was completely satisfied.  

What do you think?  What would you consider an appropriate standard of care before a doctor determines that the typical vaccination schedule is or is not appropriate for a specific individual child?