Thank you Bokonon for trying to actually address my questions/concerns and I am on the same page with you on this:
I understand that some people have very good reasons, not to vaccinate. I guess what I don't understand, I will look into threads addressing it, is the lack of belief in herd immunity. On that front:
This shows how contentious this issue really is, and as Bokonon said, the people are feeling defensive. I did not say you "should" be grateful to anyone. I am trying to understand, as the unquoted follow up question said, if ladies on this forum who do not vaccinate at all on principal (without history of severe reaction) believe they would make the same choice if they lived in a country with very low vaccination rates and higher prevalence of these diseases. As I said in my post, I think people whose children have had severe reactions to vaccines are making the right choice in ceasing to vaccinate and I vaccinate partially to protect kids who cannot get vaccines.
Several of you have said you made the choice to not vaccinate because of a reaction. That makes total sense to me. The statements that all vaccines are poison, or these diseases aren't dangerous, or that no one should get vaccines because they will get autoimmune diseases or cancer later on seem more like fear mongering trying to beat the other side (that is guilty of fear mongering as well), which doesn't do much to help me relate to the decision. Some people are allergic to all drugs and many food products or naturally occurring substances. I am allergic to sulfa drugs and brother is allergic to penicillin. If I needed antibiotics (which I have very seldom taken in my life and try all natural remedies first) I would not refuse them, but would make sure I did not take the ones I have had bad reactions too. Bee stings are relatively harmless to some, but could be deadly for my mother-in-law. Our health decisions should be based on our individual physiology. As I said before, I do not follow the CDC guidelines and have found a pediatrician that is happy to help me make my own schedule and select "safer" formulations. I guess that kind of puts me in the middle of the road in this debate. I posted a link about how old and un-corporate vaccine technology actually is (you can find it as a separate thread on this page). I guess that is what makes me believe in its potential, but remain skeptical and careful about giving too many at once or about trying to avoid additives. I would SOOO like to hear other voices that fall less on the extremes.
Wishing health and happiness to you and your families.
Thank you Bokonon for trying to actually address my questions/concerns and I am on the same page with you on this:
I understand that some people have very good reasons, not to vaccinate. I guess what I don't understand, I will look into threads addressing it, is the lack of belief in herd immunity. On that front:
This shows how contentious this issue really is, and as Bokonon said, the people are feeling defensive. I did not say you "should" be grateful to anyone. I am trying to understand, as the unquoted follow up question said, if ladies on this forum who do not vaccinate at all on principal (without history of severe reaction) believe they would make the same choice if they lived in a country with very low vaccination rates and higher prevalence of these diseases. As I said in my post, I think people whose children have had severe reactions to vaccines are making the right choice in ceasing to vaccinate and I vaccinate partially to protect kids who cannot get vaccines.
Several of you have said you made the choice to not vaccinate because of a reaction. That makes total sense to me. The statements that all vaccines are poison, or these diseases aren't dangerous, or that no one should get vaccines because they will get autoimmune diseases or cancer later on seem more like fear mongering trying to beat the other side (that is guilty of fear mongering as well), which doesn't do much to help me relate to the decision. Some people are allergic to all drugs and many food products or naturally occurring substances. I am allergic to sulfa drugs and brother is allergic to penicillin. If I needed antibiotics (which I have very seldom taken in my life and try all natural remedies first) I would not refuse them, but would make sure I did not take the ones I have had bad reactions too. Bee stings are relatively harmless to some, but could be deadly for my mother-in-law. Our health decisions should be based on our individual physiology. As I said before, I do not follow the CDC guidelines and have found a pediatrician that is happy to help me make my own schedule and select "safer" formulations. I guess that kind of puts me in the middle of the road in this debate. I posted a link about how old and un-corporate vaccine technology actually is (you can find it as a separate thread on this page). I guess that is what makes me believe in its potential, but remain skeptical and careful about giving too many at once or about trying to avoid additives. I would SOOO like to hear other voices that fall less on the extremes.
Wishing health and happiness to you and your families.
Ok but here is the thing. What do you define as extreme? I am a mother who started researching all of this BEFORE I had children. When I became pregnant with my first, I took a careful look at our family history and that coupled with what I had learned and ongoing research brought me to the conclusion that I would not vaccinate my children. Does that make my viewpoint extreme just because my child did not have a vaccine reaction? You state that health desicions should be based on our individual physicology. I couldn't agree more which is why I am against the one size fits all approach to vaccination and fully support freedom of choice in the matter. The bottom line is that you cannot possible know if your child will have a vaccine reaction. There are things that you can look st in your family history that MAY make it more likely, but the reality is that you cannot know. To me this is akin to Russian Roulette. I also believe that immunology and genetics is an merging field and there is much to learn. If one starts learning about epigentics, it is really mind boggling how little we know. Modern vaccination is a fairly new thing with most of the vaccines dating back to only 1 generation ago(and with a couple 2 generations). Science cannot possible know the long term ramifications of this practice for the vast majority of the vaccines on the schedule.
I disagree with you about vaccine technology not being corporate. Vaccination and it's orgins bear no resemblence to what is going on today. Vaccination is extremely corporate and is a multi billion dollar very lucrative practice for the pharmaceutical industry. Now that is not to say that I think all vaccines are ineffective. I think there are those that are total crap and there are those that are probably fairly effective.
as for the lack of belief in herd immunity - I guess the issue that people have with it is that it is a theory in terms of vaccination. This term was coined by A.W. Hedrich in 1933 after he had studied the dynamics fo measles outbreaks in the Boston area between 1900 and 1930. He established that when 68% of children CONTRACTED measles, the outbreaks stopped. This protection persisted until the number who had contracted or had been exposed to measles once again fell below 68% of the community. -Am J Hyg. 17:613-630. "Estimates of the child population susceptible to measles, 1900-1930."
The concept of herd immunity was intended to be applied to a population that had become immune through the NATURAL course of an infection. However, herd immunity was conveniently applied to vaccination by assuming that vaccination confers the same type of protection as natural immunity. Lifetime Immunity is only conferred through an engagement with the REAL virus. The assumption that the presence of antibodies will protect a person from illness is flawed. -Ref: Vaccine. 2001 oct15;20 Suppl1LS38-41. "What are the limits of adjuvanticity?"
Thank you Bokonon for trying to actually address my questions/concerns and I am on the same page with you on this:
I understand that some people have very good reasons, not to vaccinate. I guess what I don't understand, I will look into threads addressing it, is the lack of belief in herd immunity. On that front:
This shows how contentious this issue really is, and as Bokonon said, the people are feeling defensive. I did not say you "should" be grateful to anyone. I am trying to understand, as the unquoted follow up question said, if ladies on this forum who do not vaccinate at all on principal (without history of severe reaction) believe they would make the same choice if they lived in a country with very low vaccination rates and higher prevalence of these diseases. As I said in my post, I think people whose children have had severe reactions to vaccines are making the right choice in ceasing to vaccinate and I vaccinate partially to protect kids who cannot get vaccines.
Several of you have said you made the choice to not vaccinate because of a reaction. That makes total sense to me. The statements that all vaccines are poison, or these diseases aren't dangerous, or that no one should get vaccines because they will get autoimmune diseases or cancer later on seem more like fear mongering trying to beat the other side (that is guilty of fear mongering as well), which doesn't do much to help me relate to the decision. Some people are allergic to all drugs and many food products or naturally occurring substances. I am allergic to sulfa drugs and brother is allergic to penicillin. If I needed antibiotics (which I have very seldom taken in my life and try all natural remedies first) I would not refuse them, but would make sure I did not take the ones I have had bad reactions too. Bee stings are relatively harmless to some, but could be deadly for my mother-in-law. Our health decisions should be based on our individual physiology. As I said before, I do not follow the CDC guidelines and have found a pediatrician that is happy to help me make my own schedule and select "safer" formulations. I guess that kind of puts me in the middle of the road in this debate. I posted a link about how old and un-corporate vaccine technology actually is (you can find it as a separate thread on this page). I guess that is what makes me believe in its potential, but remain skeptical and careful about giving too many at once or about trying to avoid additives. I would SOOO like to hear other voices that fall less on the extremes.
Wishing health and happiness to you and your families.
I started to research vaxing before my pregnancy - actually my research began with my dogs. The first 2 were overvaxxed as puppies and after 2years of on/off treatments for what should have been "simple colds" (they had severe deep set pneumonia among other issues, one nearly died) and nearly $10k in vet bills later (don't I wish I had taken out that doggie insurance the day I brought them home!) I turned to natural therapies to cleanse their systems and try to heal the damage that was done. It's been 7 years and I'm still working to undo the damage. Luckily I became an advocate for myself and my animals. I changed vets - 3x - until I was able to find someone willing to work with me on using natural remedies rather than pushing drugs and antibiotics. Because of that, my newest dog was minimaly vaxxed (just rabies bc it's the law, although I have a pending state exemption for the old girl who at this time is not what I consider healthy enough to recieve the booster) and has not had a single issue to date with his health. So when it came down to having kids I had already made up my mind about a few things, and my original plan was to select/delay vax (no CP, flu, and either no or delayed/split MMR). DD came along and I had a 3 page birth plan plastered to every wall in the hospital, and handed out to every nurse I came in contact with. I knew I did not want any vaxes done in the hospital so we delayed the Hep B til her first pedi appt (2 or 3 days old?). I did round one of DTaP/Pentacel/Rota @ 2mos...and I cried for days as I watched her scream uncontrollably. She had the runs, she spit up everytime she nursed (not normal for her) and she vomited in between. She had a constant low grade fever for days and days. Her sleep? What sleep? Well lets just say she went from sleeping 10-12hrs straight at night, to maybe 1hour total, and that lasted about a month before she finally would sleep for a 3hr stretch. I postponed her 2nd DTap til 5mos as she had a very mild cold at 4mos. I opted out of the others, and even though my gut reaction was to skip the DTaP, I somehow thought her 2nd one would be better if it was alone. Nope. She has never suffered what I would consider major reactions. No high fever, no seizures, no hospitalization, I didn't even give her tylenol - she was happiest being held. But she reacted far more than I was comfortable with. I reported all her reactions and she's not behind by any means on milestones, and if anything thing she's superfocused and mobile for her age so I'm happy I don't have to worry right now about developmental issues. But it reaffirms my gut feelings that our future children will be completely unvaxxed. I won't even toy with the select/delayed becuase the 'what if' scenario of a vax reaction is far more complicated to me than the VPD itself. No one really knows how to treat these vax reactions....it''s trial and error, and since most therapies involve supplements and dietary changes, it's not something covered by insurance. But if per chance my child gets a VPD, treatments are known (I'd opt for holistic first) and even if I needed to seek conventional medical attention for some rare complication, there is more information available to doctors about VPD complications than there is about the vax reactions. So that's my reasoning. I intended to be select/delayed, and my daughter will always be partially vaxxed, but for the future we will be non-vax. Not anti-vax, just chosing to opt out.
Herd immunity - it seems more complex than it appears.
In case of measles, re-exposure from either wild virus or booster shot can boost vax-induced immunity. My limited understanding is it's different with naturally-acquired immunity. It seems re-exposure doesn't boost the latter as significantly though it has remained at protective level all along - pls correct me if I'm wrong.
If there were enough wild virus circulating, a vaxed individual may be exposed and have their immunity boosted. Otherwise, immunity might wane over time. However, the more people are vaxed, the less probabilty of exposure to wild virus is - hence, the recommended booster vax. Though I do wonder what the effect of shed vax virus is ...
The 68% figure above is interesting - and that was in the beginning of modern sanitation in the US. If the vax issue were not so polarized, it'd be a very interesting discussion topic.
I understand that some people have very good reasons, not to vaccinate.
I am uncomfortable with the idea of putting people into boxes:
-legitimate reason not to vax due to prior severe reaction and
-not legitimate reason to not vax.
It is a slippery slope: vaxxing is a parental choice, period.
I guess what I don't understand, I will look into threads addressing it, is the lack of belief in herd immunity.
The words "herd immunity" frequently raises the ire of non-vaxxers. The reason are complicated, however, and do not always come down to "lack of belief".
-some people do not believe in herd immunity
-some people (including me) think herd immunity as it relates to vaccines is a fairly complicated issue. "Herd immunity " is often brought up with fairly little concession to other factors that play into disease. Sanitation, nutrition, contagiousness (some diseases are not contagious) prevalence and effectiveness of vaccine.
-some diseases are not worth vaxxing over, IMHO. I am not going to worry about herd immunity for a disease that does not worry me.
-it is almost always trotted out in intense discussions to point fingers and blame people. It could be an interesting discussion, but it cannot be accompanied by any hint of "you are endangering us all!" or it will dissolve into a flame war.
I did not say you "should" be grateful to anyone.
No, you said this : "If your child is unvaccinated are you really not grateful that others are?" You may not have used the "should" word, but you came fairly close.
I am trying to understand, as the unquoted follow up question said, if ladies on this forum who do not vaccinate at all on principal (without history of severe reaction) believe they would make the same choice if they lived in a country with very low vaccination rates and higher prevalence of these diseases.
Depends on the disease, the vax, the prevalence of the disease and the access to decent medical care. You asked if I was grateful? I am very grateful to live where I live.
Several of you have said you made the choice to not vaccinate because of a reaction. That makes total sense to me. The statements that all vaccines are poison, or these diseases aren't dangerous, or that no one should get vaccines because they will get autoimmune diseases or cancer later on seem more like fear mongering trying to beat the other side (that is guilty of fear mongering as well), which doesn't do much to help me relate to the decision.
The word poison might be inflammatory (and is not used often here, as far as I can tell) - however there are interesting ingredients in vaccines, and they have not been well tested on infants. That is not fear-mongerring - it is the truth. Here is Dr. Sears on aluminum:
http://www.askdrsears.com/topics/vaccines/vaccine-faqs
Some diseases are not dangerous. Rubella is not dangerous for children. It is dangerous for pregnant women and their infants. This is fact as well.
Ladies- Thank you for clarifying your perspectives in such straight-forward and calm manners. I was reading the archives and saw such collegial friendly debate on a few threads; I am glad there are still people that prefer to discuss things in this manner. We really can talk about this without vitriol. 
I know it is an issue that is sensitive for many of us, and although I am trying to be sensitive, I may screw up at times, so sorry if use words that raise hackles.
On the grateful question:
I have met (online) parents of unvaccinated children who are grateful others vaccinate. Usually they are pro-vax at heart, and agree with pro-vax arguments, but cannot vaccinate their child due to medical reasons.
This is very different from someone who does not vaccinate because they think the risks outweigh the pros, and is non-vax at heart. You are only going to feel grateful someone does something if you think the "something" is a good idea in the first place.
Ignore the join date next to my name (I have been here since 2006). I have only ever seen one person say "I am grateful others vax, but I am not going to."
agree...not grateful...because I don't buy into vaccinations or "herd immunity" in the first place. I actually feel concerned when freshly vaccinated kids show up for a play date and their parent doesn't even know what shots they just received a few hours ago... no I am not grateful their child with bandages is sharing sippy cups and toys with mine... perhaps a medically unfounded concern but it still really bothers me.
Follow Mothering