or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Call out to anyone pro-vaxxer who has brought up "first world, privileged women" lately…...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Call out to anyone pro-vaxxer who has brought up "first world, privileged women" lately…... - Page 2

post #21 of 35

I think it would actually be safer to not vaccinate if more people didn't.  Then some of these diseases kids are supposed to get in childhood wouldn't be so rare.  They would get them at an appropriate time and not later as adult when there could be more complications. 

post #22 of 35
Thread Starter 

Even if the below premise is true, I still do not understand why someone would bother saying it. 

 

It really does remind me of the "eat your food, children in xyz are starving" saying.

 

It comes across a little bit as patronising and chastising.  Remove vaccines from the equation....if you were talking about whether antibiotics were overused in North America and someone came on and said you were a priveleged first world woman, you would prboably be like "wtf?"  ( at least I would - I know I am lucky, and it is not your job to remind me, nor do I need it).

 

Ah, well, my conclusion is they just don't like non-vaxxers, so they get in a dig this way, even if it makes little sense.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erin77 View Post

"...to remind people this choice is a great privilege and that everyone in the world does not have the same luxury and that vaccinations can be a good thing. " -PP

 

I think it is brought up to remind non-vaccinators that their choice would not be even moderately safely possible without the choice of many others to vaccinate. 



 

post #23 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post

Even if the below premise is true, I still do not understand why someone would bother saying it. 

 

It really does remind me of the "eat your food, children in xyz are starving" saying.

 

It comes across a little bit as patronising and chastising.  Remove vaccines from the equation....if you were talking about whether antibiotics were overused in North America and someone came on and said you were a priveleged first world woman, you would prboably be like "wtf?"  ( at least I would - I know I am lucky, and it is not your job to remind me, nor do I need it).

 

Ah, well, my conclusion is they just don't like non-vaxxers, so they get in a dig this way, even if it makes little sense.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erin77 View Post

"...to remind people this choice is a great privilege and that everyone in the world does not have the same luxury and that vaccinations can be a good thing. " -PP

 

I think it is brought up to remind non-vaccinators that their choice would not be even moderately safely possible without the choice of many others to vaccinate. 



 


That's exactly how I interpreted it too.

 

post #24 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bokonon View Post

I was just talking to my mom (born in the mid-40s) about vaccines on the phone today.

 

I explained my experiences with vaccinating my children, which I had already told her about little by little, and she said that it sounded ridiculous to her that there are so many more shots on the schedule today.

 

She said that there was a child in her school who died of polio, and then the inoculations started.  She also reminded me that my grandmother had polio in her 30s and recovered without issue.  I told her about the quote from Jonas Salk, about how he thought the polio vaccine was responsible for more cases of polio than it prevented.  I mentioned that the US currently uses the inactive polio vaccine, and sends the live polio vaccine to developing nations.

 

She said, and I quote, "Well, better them than us, I guess."  

 

yikes2.gif


I don't have time to elaborate because DD just woke up, but I had a very similar conversation about a month ago!

 

post #25 of 35

That's great for your grandmother. My mother in law got polio in one of the very last big waves of it, before the vaccine came out. Doctors told her mother she'd never walk again, but after a year of intense therapy, my MIL was back on her feet. Now she has post polio syndrome and it will probably put her back in a wheelchair. My uncle was totally deafened by mumps as a child. So there's some anecdotes from the other side.

 

I was one who referred to the privileged first world idea. It has nothing to do with "people are starving in Africa so eat your peas". I'm saying that in general, your problems are so miniscule in relation to much of the world that you have lost perspective. By far the most common side effects of vaccines are tenderness at the site of the shot and fussiness. I'll be frank: I think a lot, perhaps most, of the "adverse events" people pin on vaccines are a) in their heads or b)related by correlation only. 

post #26 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katie8681 View Post

 I'll be frank: I think a lot, perhaps most, of the "adverse events" people pin on vaccines are a) in their heads or b)related by correlation only. 



You think that because your child has never experienced an adverse event.  If your child had, you would think differently.  You choose to believe the best in what the pharmaceutical companies sell and the worst in what the affected parents say.

 

It's so interesting to me how this community encourages "Trust birth!" and "Mama's instincts are best!" and "Your pediatrician doesn't know how to care for an intact penis!" and then there are same-thinking members who think that mothers who claim that their children have vaccine injuries MUST be wrong.  It's hypocrisy, and helps no one.

post #27 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katie8681 View Post
. By far the most common side effects of vaccines are tenderness at the site of the shot and fussiness. I'll be frank: I think a lot, perhaps most, of the "adverse events" people pin on vaccines are a) in their heads or b)related by correlation only. 


you obviously never had a child get sicker and sicker with every vax he got....i saw it with my own eyes, and he suffered with his body reacting after   every   single   one...........i watched his allergies develop and worsen, asthma developed at 4mos old,  his immune system fail him repeatedly,  his skin condition which is hereditary started after his 2mo vaxes, and continued to get worse and worse...now he's a constantly sick adult.......  is that in our heads? 

post #28 of 35

Isn't the whole point of the "argument" (i'm pro-vax but i wouldn't say something like that to someone) just "be grateful for what you have"?

 

I do think we (all of us, however we vax) can lose touch of how other people in other parts of the world are living.  I mean, it might have been good if someone had told Gina Ford that however "great" it might be to have a sleep-trained, routine-tied, low-maintenance baby, many of the women in the world are actually hoping it'll SURVIVE the night, never mind sleep through it.  It's just a (clumsy) way of trying to get someone else to see a different perspective from the one they're displaying.  It's probably one of the less useful ways of doing so, definitely, but i guess that's the context i always view it in (i vax, but i do a lot of other stuff that is non-mainstream, so i too get the "that's just your privilege talking!" given to me a lot).

post #29 of 35
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katie8681 View Post

 

I was one who referred to the privileged first world idea. It has nothing to do with "people are starving in Africa so eat your peas". I'm saying that in general, your problems are so miniscule in relation to much of the world that you have lost perspective. By far the most common side effects of vaccines are tenderness at the site of the shot and fussiness. I'll be frank: I think a lot, perhaps most, of the "adverse events" people pin on vaccines are a) in their heads or b)related by correlation only. 



That's a privileged attitude as well.  If your child had no side effects you were lucky (privileged?).  It does not matter how rare we think vaccine reactions are - everyone knows they exist.  If your child had a vax and no reaction you are lucky.  

 

 

 

 


Edited by purslaine - 2/24/12 at 5:35am
post #30 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post

That's a privileged attitude as well.  If your child had no side effects you were lucky (privileged?).  It does not matter how rare we think vaccine reactions are - everyone knows they exist.  If your child had a vax and no reaction you are lucky.  

 

 

Luck and privilege are hardly the same thing. I don't think that adverse vaccine reactions (or lack thereof) have anything to do with either luck or privilege - most likely its related to genetics and/or some environmental triggers (surely there is no real way of knowing). I also don't think that vax reactions are as common as people on this board seem to think - MDC is hardly a representation of society (any society) as a whole.

 

Privilege though, is related to a persons status in society. Luck, I don't know what luck is or isn't - I think people can make their own luck, and people can have things happen to them that are "lucky" and "unlucky" that an individual would have no control over, or the ability to prevent. I just don't think vaxes fall into the lucky/unlucky debate.
 

And really, my whole issue with 1st world privilege, is that in the developed world children don't often die of common, non-vax preventable diseases (diarrhea, vomiting, dehydration, starvation) - the fact that we have access to vaccines, and the ability to choose/decline/accept the medical treatment that we have access to is a big deal. People all over the world have NO medical care, no access to a nurse, doctor, emergency hotline, or anything. We are able to treat common illnesses, and common childhood troubles (that have nothing to do with vaxes), and our children live long enough for us to plan for things like a delayed vax schedule, or to delay until they start school, etc. In the first world we have lost sight of that, and are "privileged" just because we have running water and flush toilets, and ready access to soap. It doesn't have anything to do with vaxes really.

 

post #31 of 35

ehh, what is it? 1/6 children has a learning disability of some sort now and 1/110?100 has autism? I'm not saying that is all from vaccines, but I do think vaccines probably play some part in those numbers, along with many other factors of our first world lifestyles and environment. There is a whole generation of children with massive problems. And actually, that is pretty serious for the generation of parents right now who are going to be faced with the baby boomers all of advanced age and a generation of kids with massive disabilities coming into adulthood. 

 

We have our own whole other set of problems not comparable with health issues in war ravaged, famine stricken nations. Should we not be concerned with the health of our children because someone somewhere does not have access to clean water? If you can tell me with 100% certainty that the issues children are facing have nothing to do with vaccination, and tell me what is the culprit, please do so so we can fix that I can go back to being concerned with something else.

 

I do no think most parents concerned with vaccination are really worried about the sore red reaction site, I think they are worried about severe reactions and other issues we are not aware of - long term health issues, autoimmune and developmental issues, etc. And, this is just my opinion, but people are reacting to the massive increase in the vax schedule - it just makes sense, that based on the basic premise that vax can cause severe reactions and death (no matter how rare), the more vax is added, the more severe reactions and deaths will result. Who knows the cumulative, synergistic effects the vaccine schedule may have. 

post #32 of 35
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Super~Single~Mama View Post

 

Luck and privilege are hardly the same thing. I don't think that adverse vaccine reactions (or lack thereof) have anything to do with either luck or privilege - most likely its related to genetics and/or some environmental triggers (surely there is no real way of knowing). I also don't think that vax reactions are as common as people on this board seem to think - MDC is hardly a representation of society (any society) as a whole.

 

Privilege though, is related to a persons status in society. Luck, I don't know what luck is or isn't - I think people can make their own luck, and people can have things happen to them that are "lucky" and "unlucky" that an individual would have no control over, or the ability to prevent. I just don't think vaxes fall into the lucky/unlucky debate.

 

I think a good portion of privilege is  luck.

 

It was luck I was born where I was, to whom I was in a state of health.  I did not do anything to deserve this.

 

You are right in saying vaccine reactions are most likely related to genetics and environmental triggers - if we are going to ask parents to assume the risks of vaccinating we really should do a much better job of exploring what genetic and environmental factors are at play - and I think we should do a much better job of explaining that sometimes people have a reaction even with no known risk factors.   
 

And really, my whole issue with 1st world privilege, is that in the developed world children don't often die of common, non-vax preventable diseases (diarrhea, vomiting, dehydration, starvation) - the fact that we have access to vaccines, and the ability to choose/decline/accept the medical treatment that we have access to is a big deal. People all over the world have NO medical care, no access to a nurse, doctor, emergency hotline, or anything. We are able to treat common illnesses, and common childhood troubles (that have nothing to do with vaxes), and our children live long enough for us to plan for things like a delayed vax schedule, or to delay until they start school, etc. In the first world we have lost sight of that, and are "privileged" just because we have running water and flush toilets, and ready access to soap. It doesn't have anything to do with vaxes really.

 

Bolding mine.  I know that.  I think most people here know it.  I have no idea why some people feel the need to remind anyone (and it is somewhat assumptive to remind people of their privilege…what make you (general you) think they don't already know it? ).  Discussions around first world privilege may be relevant if anyone is trying to apply 1st world health decisions to 3rd world realities…but is otherwise irrelevant.



 

post #33 of 35

 

Quote:

 

You are right in saying vaccine reactions are most likely related to genetics and environmental triggers - if we are going to ask parents to assume the risks of vaccinating we really should do a much better job of exploring what genetic and environmental factors are at play - and I think we should do a much better job of explaining that sometimes people have a reaction even with no known risk factors.   
 

 

Create the grants and find someone to design the study and do the research. I'm not sure there is any way of determining what the effects of vax are, or who is at risk for adverse reactions. But then you'll be faced with the problem that an anti-vax individual funded the research, and if you follow the money that clearly determines the outcome of the research - so if it comes back in your favor it won't be trustworthy.

post #34 of 35

So, was this whole thread just to complain about vaxxers?  Was it not possible to debate the comments about it being a "first world problem" in the actual threads/ context where the comment was made?  Is this just to further demonize the other side?  I guess the benefit being that the "oppressed" in the world at large (the non-vaxxers) get to come on MDC and get aggresive towards the vaxxers, perhaps so everyone gets a turn at being the oppressor?  I can only imagine the challenges of being a non-vaxxer in a community that is not supportive of it- except when I come here and see the vaxxers treated the same way (with the obvious and important distinction that this is all intellectual debate and no one is coming at anyone with a needle here).

 

post #35 of 35
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ratchet View Post

So, was this whole thread just to complain about vaxxers?  Was it not possible to debate the comments about it being a "first world problem" in the actual threads/ context where the comment was made?  Is this just to further demonize the other side?  I guess the benefit being that the "oppressed" in the world at large (the non-vaxxers) get to come on MDC and get aggresive towards the vaxxers, perhaps so everyone gets a turn at being the oppressor?  I can only imagine the challenges of being a non-vaxxer in a community that is not supportive of it- except when I come here and see the vaxxers treated the same way (with the obvious and important distinction that this is all intellectual debate and no one is coming at anyone with a needle here).

 

eyesroll.gif  and  they started it  winky.gif

 

There were a minimum of 2 comment in the last 2 weeks mentioning privileged first world women.   I think there were actually more, but I don't feel like going through numerous posts to find out.

 

I did not bring it up in the posts they said it in as I thought it would be going further OT.  

 

If you say irrelevant and chastising things, and in this case it was multiple posters and repeatedly, it is reasonable to expect to be called on it.  

 

Last week a troll came on and said non-vaxxer are child abusers.  That was aggressive and demonizing.   To claim this is aggressive and demonizing is laughable.  

 

 

 

 

 

 


Edited by purslaine - 2/25/12 at 11:38am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Vaccinations
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Call out to anyone pro-vaxxer who has brought up "first world, privileged women" lately…...