or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Welcome to Mothering! › Site Help › Why is pro-vaccine talk fully supported (even encouraged - it has its own board)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Why is pro-vaccine talk fully supported (even encouraged - it has its own board) - Page 2

post #21 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bokonon View Post

 

And isn't that a bit hypocritical?  That informed choice is valid for one aspect of parenting and not others?  That altering a baby's foreskin is wrong, but altering their immune systems is fine.


I think its been said very well from others here....there are documented and significant benefits from vaccination (i.e. disease prevention) whether some believe that or not, while circumcision harms boys.  Even if some believe that there are medical benefits to being circumcised, the period of risk for these is not in childhood (thus negating the need for this to be done in infancy).

post #22 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by emma1325 View Post


Sure, that's the general consensus here. But what about in real life? The AAP recently changed its position on this, stating that the medical benefits of RIC do, in fact, outweigh the risks.

 

That's not quite what they said. However, it doesn't matter, as they made NO case for the benefits of infant circumcision outweighing the risks of grown men still having their foreskins. They push infant circ, because they know that most grown men are going to react that same way ds1 did, when he found out about the practice of circ: "They cut of what? WHYYY?? That's the best part." Get them when they have no say, even though it makes no sense.

 

The illnesses for which children are given vaccinations are childhood illnesses. The debate is about whether this is a medical procedure that a given parent wants to have performed on their child. This decision isn't one where a parent can just say "I'll wait and see what he/she wants to do when they're older," because the child is in danger of catching the illnesses in question now, not later. I don't see circ as a valid preventive medical procedure, but even if I did, there is NO reason to cut the foreskin off a newborn, to prevent that boy from catching HIV when he's an adult. The surgery simply does not need to be done on an infant. There's no benefit to doing it routinely on an infant. Even if it prevented 50%, or more, of HIV cases (which it clearly doesn't, as the adult male population of the US is mostly circ'd, and HIV has been a big problem), performing in on an infant makes no sense. Maybe the guy's going to have super low libido and not even have sex. Maybe he's going to be a priest. Maybe he's going to have functioning brain cells and use a freaking condom.  Whatever his adult choices, he's not going to be having unsafe sex when he's a few days old, yk?

post #23 of 120
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fyrestorm View Post

But they still don't recommend it and they do recommend vaccines.

 

Keep in mind that the AAP is simply a trade organization.  They are there to protect their members, not your children.  They are fighting to protect their member's revenue stream.  Vaccines and circumcision do both of those things. Note that in their recent statement, they are practically begging to continue 3rd party reimbursement for their genital cutting services.


Many doctors recommend it, based on the medical literature.  The AAP's new stance only serves to strengthen the pro-RIC side of this (obviously, and unfortunately).

post #24 of 120
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TCMoulton View Post


Why do the mothers here at MDC who, after their own research and reflection, have chosen to vaccinate on whatever schedule suits their family not deserve validation for their choice?


This isn't about anyone "deserving" anything; it's simply about whether or not MDC should promote a medical intervention, which holds risks, performed on a healthy child.  That's not to say open discussion should not be allowed regarding vaccine issues.  But support and promotion?  I'm not sure.

post #25 of 120
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by philomom View Post


And I guess you don't understand that altering boys cripples men. There's a huge host of grown up men problems after having been cut as a baby. It is irreparable harm.
Select vaxing my children doesn't even come close to that.
I would completely flip out if MDC supported any discussion of routine infant circumcision. But hosting a safe place to voice my concerns over the Guardisil vaccine is NEEDED.

 

And yet there's not really any proof that vaccines don't cause long term issues, is there?  It is a medical procedure with risks which are not well understood, performed on babies and children who cannot consent to such a risk. 

 

I honestly DO understand that altering boys cripples men...and that has what led me to this question/concern.  I would also flip out of MDC supported discussion of RIC.

post #26 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by emma1325 View Post

 

And yet there's not really any proof that vaccines don't cause long term issues, is there?  It is a medical procedure with risks which are not well understood, performed on babies and children who cannot consent to such a risk.

 

I think the point missing here is that vaccines also have the well-documented benefit of disease prevention in childhood, whereas circumcision does not.  As parents we conduct risk assessments on a daily basis.  Yes, there is a risk of a reaction to that vaccine, but there are also risks associated with vaccine-preventable disease and parents need to make a decision based on that relative risk assessment.  The distinction between vaccines and routine circumcision of infants in terms of risk assessment seems pretty obvious to me.   

post #27 of 120

Because there is strong research that supports vaccination and very little research that supports circ.

post #28 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by emma1325 View Post


This isn't about anyone "deserving" anything; it's simply about whether or not MDC should promote a medical intervention, which holds risks, performed on a healthy child.  That's not to say open discussion should not be allowed regarding vaccine issues.  But support and promotion?  I'm not sure.

Where exactly are they "promoting" vaccination in the forums, I personally have never seen such a thing here.
post #29 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by queenjane View Post

...is there a forum for moms who feed formula? (i havent looked, so i dont know...its a sincere question) The vast majority of kids do 'just fine' with formula just as most kids dont have obvious negative effects from vaccines. Is there an acceptable place on MDC to talk about the pros/cons of various formulas, the best bottles, etc? (again, sincere question) If not, then i would ask why not?

There is not an entire area dedicated to it but I've seen it come up in these forums:

Adoptive and Foster Parenting

NICU and Preemie Parenting

 

For the record, as an adoptive mom who used formula, I appreciated the bit of support I found here for it.

post #30 of 120
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TCMoulton View Post


Where exactly are they "promoting" vaccination in the forums, I personally have never seen such a thing here.

 

In the "selective/delayed vaccines" board.  It seems to promote vaccinating much in the same way an "I'm circumcising" board would promote circumcising.

post #31 of 120
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by marsupial-mom View Post

There is not an entire area dedicated to it but I've seen it come up in these forums:

Adoptive and Foster Parenting

NICU and Preemie Parenting

 

For the record, as an adoptive mom who used formula, I appreciated the bit of support I found here for it.

 

Do you think a "formula support" board would be warranted in this case?  Just curious. 

post #32 of 120
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by crayfishgirl View Post

 

I think the point missing here is that vaccines also have the well-documented benefit of disease prevention in childhood, whereas circumcision does not.  As parents we conduct risk assessments on a daily basis.  Yes, there is a risk of a reaction to that vaccine, but there are also risks associated with vaccine-preventable disease and parents need to make a decision based on that relative risk assessment.  The distinction between vaccines and routine circumcision of infants in terms of risk assessment seems pretty obvious to me.   

You can argue that vaccines have more obvious benefits, but the fact remains that both vaccinating and circumcising are supported by the mainstream medical community, and are interventions performed on healthy babies who cannot consent to the risks.

post #33 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by emma1325 View Post

You can argue that vaccines have more obvious benefits, but the fact remains that both vaccinating and circumcising are supported by the mainstream medical community, and are interventions performed on healthy babies who cannot consent to the risks.

 

And until just a few years ago, RIC was considered to have benefits that outweighed the risks...much as vaccinating does now.  These things change as years pass and more research is done.  Thalidomide was once considered beneficial to pregnant women as well, as was smoking.

post #34 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by emma1325 View Post

 

Do you think a "formula support" board would be warranted in this case?  Just curious. 

 

 

Why not?  Everyone needs support.

post #35 of 120
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imakcerka View Post

 

 

Why not?  Everyone needs support.

 

I see no reason why not. 

post #36 of 120
Quote:

There is not an entire area dedicated to it but I've seen it come up in these forums:

Adoptive and Foster Parenting

NICU and Preemie Parenting

but it is not one bit helpful to the new member who does not know to go into these two mentioned sections and besides one box does not fit all! same with this threads topic

post #37 of 120

For one, you can stop vaccinating at any time. Once a circ is done, it's done. Most of us who fully or partially vaccinate see it as helpful, not harmful. Yup, the same can be said of all the other circumstances (RIC, spanking, CIO, formula, etc). Don't people ask questions about cribs all the time here? Or about hospital births? Or about the experiences of those who have had epidurals or scheduled c-sections? Don't people who opt for UCs sometimes get slammed? Everyone draws the "altering the body" line somewhere different.

 

If I had a question about a specific vaccine, I could ask it in the vaccine forum, but I have seen partial vaccinators say that they don't want full-vaxxers in their subforum, so.. IDK, I have no problem w/ full vaxxers asking questions in the main forum and leaving the subforums to the less popular choices.

post #38 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by emma1325 View Post

You can argue that vaccines have more obvious benefits, but the fact remains that both vaccinating and circumcising are supported by the mainstream medical community, and are interventions performed on healthy babies who cannot consent to the risks.

Mainstream does not always equal evil and damaging to people.
post #39 of 120
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bokonon View Post

 

And until just a few years ago, RIC was considered to have benefits that outweighed the risks...much as vaccinating does now.  These things change as years pass and more research is done.  Thalidomide was once considered beneficial to pregnant women as well, as was smoking.

 

Yes!  Exactly. Routine medical interventions performed on healthy children should not be supported, promoted or encouraged by MDC.  That's not to say conversations shouldn't be allowed...it's just that the board implies promotion.

post #40 of 120
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TCMoulton View Post


Mainstream does not always equal evil and damaging to people.


You're putting words in my mouth.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Site Help
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Welcome to Mothering! › Site Help › Why is pro-vaccine talk fully supported (even encouraged - it has its own board)