Dangers of VPDs to older children and adults who are not vaxed - Page 2

[MarineWife]

Originally Posted by kathymuggle 

I have not vaccinated my kids (well, my son got a bit before I changed my mind on the issue) but I am considering  both rubella and CP for the girls as they hit their teen years.  I will check titres first, and see how many actual cases of rubella and CP are floating around.  In some ways this should be an adult decision, but we do know teen girls occasionally get pregnant

I know a woman who had CP when she was pregnant and  the baby was affected greatly.

I might get a shingles vax when I am older...or not.  I do consider it an adult decision, as such I think you can leave the decision to your kids.  JMHO.

When I went back to reading about the diseases the other day, the only one that really made me consider having my children vaxed for herd immunity was rubella. I wouldn't want my boys to be the cause of someone's unborn baby being harmed. Although, I guess as you pointed out with CP, any of these diseases could potentially harm an unborn baby. You make a good point that it should be an adult decision. Women and teens who are of childbearing age can get titres done and then decide if they want or need any vaccines before becoming pg.

[firqueen]

I know this is a bit of an old topic but just wanted to throw in my two cents here.  I had CP as an adult and it was unpleasant as I had a pretty bad case of it, but no serious complications. It is true that adults have a greater likelihood of getting complications with CP, though. Also it is bad for a pregnant woman to get CP as it can cause birth defects in her unborn child.  If the vaccine had been available prior to my first pregnancy, I would have gotten it then, rather than go into childbearing years unprotected.

If I had a male child who was approaching puberty but had never had mumps, then I might consider the mumps vaccine for him at that time, since one complication of mumps for a pubescent male is sterility. 

If my child were going to be traveling abroad and encountering people likely to be infected with a variety of diseases, again, would recommend vaccination prior to the trip. 

I am not a fan of adults running to the drugstore every October to get their yearly flu vaccine (I have never done this), but on the other hand, for a handful of vaccinations to be given to adults or even older children, I am not as concerned. My main concern is the vaccine schedule for infants and children as it stands right now. I think it's unconscionable.  

[lokidoki]

Originally Posted by firqueen 

I know this is a bit of an old topic but just wanted to throw in my two cents here.  I had CP as an adult and it was unpleasant as I had a pretty bad case of it, but no serious complications. It is true that adults have a greater likelihood of getting complications with CP, though. Also it is bad for a pregnant woman to get CP as it can cause birth defects in her unborn child.  If the vaccine had been available prior to my first pregnancy, I would have gotten it then, rather than go into childbearing years unprotected.

If I had a male child who was approaching puberty but had never had mumps, then I might consider the mumps vaccine for him at that time, since one complication of mumps for a pubescent male is sterility. 

If my child were going to be traveling abroad and encountering people likely to be infected with a variety of diseases, again, would recommend vaccination prior to the trip. 

I am not a fan of adults running to the drugstore every October to get their yearly flu vaccine (I have never done this), but on the other hand, for a handful of vaccinations to be given to adults or even older children, I am not as concerned. My main concern is the vaccine schedule for infants and children as it stands right now. I think it's unconscionable.  

I am glad you bumped this thread. I think one of my major issues with vaccines (well, one of many) is that it shifts the burden of disease onto a section of population that gets the disease worse than when you have it as as child. For instance ~ chicken pox which is spoken of frequently in this thread ~ the burden gets shifted to the older population and can have far more harmful issues arise. Then you have Rubella ~ a very benign thing to have as a child but causes birth defects in pregnant women. So then they vax young children and then vax again when they are older (generally) because immunity has waned from the original vax.

There was a time when I thought there was perhaps a "right" time to vax (or at least a more appropriate time than moments after a baby has been born...Hep B). But the more I read and the more experience I have with not vaxing ~ the more inclined I am to never get another vax so long as I live...and encourage my children to do the same!
 

[kathymuggle]

Originally Posted by lokidoki 

I am glad you bumped this thread. I think one of my major issues with vaccines (well, one of many) is that it shifts the burden of disease onto a section of population that gets the disease worse than when you have it as as child. For instance ~ chicken pox which is spoken of frequently in this thread ~ the burden gets shifted to the older population and can have far more harmful issues arise. 

There was a time when I thought there was perhaps a "right" time to vax (or at least a more appropriate time than moments after a baby has been born...Hep B).

And likewise the burden of vaccines is shifted onto the very young.  We vaccinate babies against CP, rubella, mumps because of concerns related to reproduction.  Um - why can't we see if they get the disease,  check for titres and vaccinate if we so choose when the children are much older?  Of course, there are some vaxxes which are more appropriate  to get in infancy.   I think DPaT has a horrible track record, but if you want to cross your fingers and take the little immunity to pertussis is dishes out, infancy is the time to do it.  Pertussis is no walk in the park for infants.  

I read an article a number of years ago that suggested the reason we shift the burden of vaccines onto the young is compliance.  We can get people to bring their babies in for vaccines (often out of fear of disease hitting their newborn) but it is more difficult to get older children and adults in to vax.  

Shifting the burden of vaccines onto the very young for compliance rates is not something I am comfortable with.  

[lokidoki]

Originally Posted by kathymuggle 

And likewise the burden of vaccines is shifted onto the very young.  We vaccinate babies against CP, rubella, mumps because of concerns related to reproduction.  Um - why can't we see if they get the disease,  check for titres and vaccinate if we so choose when the children are much older?  Of course, there are some vaxxes which are more appropriate  to get in infancy.   I think DPaT has a horrible track record, but if you want to cross your fingers and take the little immunity to pertussis is dishes out, infancy is the time to do it.  Pertussis is no walk in the park for infants.  

I read an article a number of years ago that suggested the reason we shift the burden of vaccines onto the young is compliance.  We can get people to bring their babies in for vaccines (often out of fear of disease hitting their newborn) but it is more difficult to get older children and adults in to vax.  

Shifting the burden of vaccines onto the very young for compliance rates is not something I am comfortable with.  

Well ~ compliance and money if you are a conspiracy theorist like me ! It was the same argument the vets put up when the vaccine fight was happening with pets ~ the vets say "the people won't bring in their pets annually if they do not have to get shots"! That statement has no regard for the health of the animal but every regard for the money in the pocket!

I had the flu earlier this year and it was AWFUL because I was pregnant and also had Obstetric Cholestasis (pregancy induced liver condition) ~ and you know, not once did I ever wish I had gotten the flu shot. It was awful ~ I was sick ~ but I recovered and my baby was born without that awful junk injected into my body (and he and I are both healthier for it).

[firqueen]

I had the flu in college, without the pregnancy and cholelithiasis, and that was bad enough. But I never once got a flu shot. Never wanted one. It didn't make sense to me either since the flu shot is only targeting the most common flu virus for that season, but is by no means the ONLY flu virus that could go around. So what's the point? And doing it yearly?  It has been 30 years since I got the flu and I haven't gotten it since. I worked in high risk environments, had children, etc, and still never got it again.  I mean, is it really that common? I wonder why I've only gotten it once. I could see if you were in a special category where the flu was particularly risky, but not for just any old Joe Blow. It is always annoying to go to the GROCERY store and see a sign that says "get your flu shot here today!"  Bizarre.