Why is pro-vaccine talk fully supported (even encouraged - it has its own board) - Page 3

[Adaline'sMama]

I think that mothering has made the stance on numerous occasions that their reasoning for not having forums for support for many of these things (particularly formula and circing for religious or medical reasons) is because so many other parenting sites provide support for those issues. In a community of people who primarily breastfeed, it's not the greatest place to get tons of opinions on bottle nipples.

Babycenter and DiaperSwappers have tons and tons of threads where 100s of people give their opinion and experiences on those types of things. I have accounts at both of those places specifically for things that Mothering doesnt provide. They have a HUGE infant loss forum, a bunch of opinions on "stuff" that most people at MDC dont use/want/need, and forums for things that are a little more mainstream. If you ask about an organic formula here, you are going to get 10 million tips for breastfeeding, reasons that your doctor is wrong about telling you to supplement, and opinions on what you should be doing instead of feeding formula. If you ask on a different forum, you'll get 50 different women telling you what their kids drank and why they chose that formula. Some things are just not the greatest topics for this community. Recently, MDC has added a forum for moms who have had C-sections, which I think was a fantastic addition. I have seen much fewer arguments about C sections since that forum went up. 

That being said, I think that MDC has not been able to cater to almost half of their community in regards to vaccination topics because so many of us DO choose to vax (selectively, delayed, or thoughtfully on schedule) and tire easily of defending our decisions from the 10 die-hard anti-vax posters who will argue with anything that gets posted in the forum. .But, as I've said before, I think there should be a vax board that talks about everything vax and then a board just for people who don't vax.

[kathymuggle]

Originally Posted by dogretro 

For one, you can stop vaccinating at any time. Once a circ is done, it's done. 

You cannot undo a vaccine, either.  

In most people it is no big deal - for those whose children have a severe vaccine reaction it is a very big deal. 

[emma1325]

Originally Posted by dogretro 

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.

Sure, you can stop vaccinating, but it certainly can't be "taken back."  My child suffers long term because of the toxic ingredients in vaccines.  Sure, there's chelation, but then again, there's also foreskin restoration.

I'm not sure where you stand on the board topic though...are you still feeling it out?  Maybe I missed your point.

[emma1325]

Originally Posted by Adaline'sMama 

I think that mothering has made the stance on numerous occasions that their reasoning for not having forums for support for many of these things (particularly formula and circing for religious or medical reasons) is because so many other parenting sites provide support for those issues. In a community of people who primarily breastfeed, it's not the greatest place to get tons of opinions on bottle nipples.

Babycenter and DiaperSwappers have tons and tons of threads where 100s of people give their opinion and experiences on those types of things. I have accounts at both of those places specifically for things that Mothering doesnt provide. They have a HUGE infant loss forum, a bunch of opinions on "stuff" that most people at MDC dont use/want/need, and forums for things that are a little more mainstream. If you ask about an organic formula here, you are going to get 10 million tips for breastfeeding, reasons that your doctor is wrong about telling you to supplement, and opinions on what you should be doing instead of feeding formula. If you ask on a different forum, you'll get 50 different women telling you what their kids drank and why they chose that formula. Some things are just not the greatest topics for this community. Recently, MDC has added a forum for moms who have had C-sections, which I think was a fantastic addition. I have seen much fewer arguments about C sections since that forum went up. 

That being said, I think that MDC has not been able to cater to almost half of their community in regards to vaccination topics because so many of us DO choose to vax (selectively, delayed, or thoughtfully on schedule) and tire easily of defending our decisions from the 10 die-hard anti-vax posters who will argue with anything that gets posted in the forum. .But, as I've said before, I think there should be a vax board that talks about everything vax and then a board just for people who don't vax.

Babycenter and Diaper Swappers also have open discussion on vaccinating...so you could argue the same thing about that topic.  Pro-vaccine support is everywhere.  Also, I'm not sure why "anti-vax" needs to be used in a negative way, considering those individuals are simply in favor of the biological norm, just as many pro-breastfeeders and anti-circ'ers.

[Adaline'sMama]

My point was that half of the people who post here do vax, at least somewhat. 

Half of this community does not formula feed or circ. Those mamas are much few and further between than moms who vax. 

[MeepyCat]

In order for MDC to remain viable as a commercial venture, it needs to be at least somewhat welcoming to a user base that is at least somewhat diverse.

Actually, MDC is really bad at this.  The target demographic appears to be natural birthing, babywearing, extended breastfeeding, non-vaxxing, homeschooling, straight, white mothers of gifted children.  Occasionally, it seems that MDC caters to even narrower demographics - there's a pretty deep base of UCing, Waldorf educating, and unschooling mothers, who sometimes seem to drown out other voices.  I can recall many occasions on which users who do not fit these descriptions have pointed out that they feel excluded, and feel hurt by that exclusion.  The example that springs most readily to mind is the years of agitation it took to get a space to discuss c-sections - there used to be a board for VBAC, and for Healing Birth Trauma, but not for women who just wanted to talk about the surgeries they'd had, or might be having, or planned to have.

MDC being bad at having a diverse user base is a problem for them, as a business.  Users get ticked off and stop coming, and when that happens, MDC makes less and less money.  There have been some indications lately of MDC trying to increase click counts and page views.  The moderation sometimes seems to let spam, and extreme and indefensible posts kind of just... hang out for a while, while MDC users post irate things in response.  Or, you know, Cynthia Mosher throws a comment into a conversation that seems designed to stir things up or keep them stirred.

Anyway - there is a "selective/delayed vax" forum, and people post there, and other people read when they do.  Every time anyone clicks on the page, MDC gets money, so it doesn't make a lot of sense for them to shut that part of the site down.  That's why there's a selective/delayed vax forum. 

Personally, I think that MDC is already pretty much parenting fantasy-land - the conversations here bear very little resemblance to the way the majority of parents behave, but because of the narrowness of the target demographic, and the ability of a comparatively few voices to dominate the discussion, increasingly extreme points of view appear reasonable in the context of this community.  If you like that feature, I guess the selective/delayed vaax forum is kind of a bummer, and should go.

[Adaline'sMama]

MeepyCat- I get what you are saying about click counts, but almost all of the huge vax threads that get tons and tons of clicks happen in the main forum or in the Im not vaxxing forum. Just go through and take a look at the "views" column on all the different vax subforums and you will quickly realize that "Selective and Delayed" is getting much less views than "Im not vaccinating" or just the general Vax forum. 

[dogretro]

My thoughts on the MDC vaccine board are that I do not see why it should change from what it is. MDC, to me, is largely about supporting choices that go against mainstream America. If I want vaccine support and advice, I can do like Adeline's Mama and go elsewhere. I do not see vaccinating and RIC as the same. I view one as protecting my children and others and the other as mutilation. Perhaps your views of vaccines would be different if your child had not suffered an adverse reaction/injury. I cannot argue that vaccinating doesn't alter the body, nor do I wish to, but I don't see them in the same category, either.

The way I interpreted the angry tone of "anti-vax" was in that the PP said, "10 die-hard anti-vax posters who will argue with anything that gets posted in the forum," NOT, "all people who do not vaccinate." It seemed as though her anger was directed towards those who will not allow her to have an open discussion, not all non-vaxxers.

[emma1325]

Originally Posted by MeepyCat 

In order for MDC to remain viable as a commercial venture, it needs to be at least somewhat welcoming to a user base that is at least somewhat diverse.

Actually, MDC is really bad at this.  The target demographic appears to be natural birthing, babywearing, extended breastfeeding, non-vaxxing, homeschooling, straight, white mothers of gifted children.  Occasionally, it seems that MDC caters to even narrower demographics - there's a pretty deep base of UCing, Waldorf educating, and unschooling mothers, who sometimes seem to drown out other voices.  I can recall many occasions on which users who do not fit these descriptions have pointed out that they feel excluded, and feel hurt by that exclusion.  The example that springs most readily to mind is the years of agitation it took to get a space to discuss c-sections - there used to be a board for VBAC, and for Healing Birth Trauma, but not for women who just wanted to talk about the surgeries they'd had, or might be having, or planned to have.

MDC being bad at having a diverse user base is a problem for them, as a business.  Users get ticked off and stop coming, and when that happens, MDC makes less and less money.  There have been some indications lately of MDC trying to increase click counts and page views.  The moderation sometimes seems to let spam, and extreme and indefensible posts kind of just... hang out for a while, while MDC users post irate things in response.  Or, you know, Cynthia Mosher throws a comment into a conversation that seems designed to stir things up or keep them stirred.

Anyway - there is a "selective/delayed vax" forum, and people post there, and other people read when they do.  Every time anyone clicks on the page, MDC gets money, so it doesn't make a lot of sense for them to shut that part of the site down.  That's why there's a selective/delayed vax forum. 

Personally, I think that MDC is already pretty much parenting fantasy-land - the conversations here bear very little resemblance to the way the majority of parents behave, but because of the narrowness of the target demographic, and the ability of a comparatively few voices to dominate the discussion, increasingly extreme points of view appear reasonable in the context of this community.  If you like that feature, I guess the selective/delayed vaax forum is kind of a bummer, and should go.

Yeah, and I get the whole exclusive vs. inclusive atmosphere thing; obviously the more people who feel welcome, the more money MDC can make, as you stated above. 

But then again, they could make even more money by welcoming pro-circumcision discussions...

Anyway.  I'm done.  It was just a thought.  I thank everyone for entertaining my concern.  :)

[kathymuggle]

I don't think mothering has a pro-vax board.

It has selective and delayed, which is not pro-vax.  

Perhaps it comes down to how you define pro-vax?

I define it as one who accepts and promotes, almost without exception, the standard vaccine schedule.

Sel/delayed does not do that.

I know there are pro-vax posters, and there have been 2 pro-vax threads that I can think of (one more so than the other).

Personally, I do not see hard core pro-vax as informed choice.  Talk of tightening school exemptions, as well as talk of just doing what your doctor or the scientists say, because they are, after all, the professionals is hardly informed choice.  

So - if MDC  wants to live up to its mission of informed pro-choice wrt to vaccines, then it needs to crack down on such talk.  That could be seen as censorshippy - but then isn't the "no circ" talk censorship in a way?

MDC has to decide if it wants to give the community space for the hard core pro-vax position or if it wants to stick to its mandate.  

Edited by kathymuggle - 9/27/12 at 8:14pm

[pek64]

As has already been said, there are other forums that are more mainstream. This one is for those who prefer to be different. Why do you want to change this one? Is there something you like about Mothering that you cannot get from the other places? If the answer is 'yes', don't you realize that if you change Mothering to be like the rest, then that something will probably go away? Why don't you appreciate what you get here.

[MeepyCat]

I know that the non-vaxxing forum is much more active, but I don't think it much matters.  So long as the cash flow from having a section is a net positive, the smart financial bet is to keep it. 

[dogretro]

As a mother who had a scheduled c/s for medical reasons, it was a burr in my side that I was not allowed to discuss any of its benefits under the old UA. I'm glad it's out in the open b/c for many (most?) of us, having a c/s was not offered as A choice, but THE choice. Birth is unpredictable :p

I'm not sure where else people who are not vaccinating or UCing or bed sharing are supposed to go to get message board support other than here. Or at least a place as big as this that has this much collective experience. THAT is what I love about MDC :D Not to try and derail, but that's my opinion. Back to the main topic, on which I already gave my opinion.

[Imakcerka]

Originally Posted by dogretro 

My thoughts on the MDC vaccine board are that I do not see why it should change from what it is. MDC, to me, is largely about supporting choices that go against mainstream America. If I want vaccine support and advice, I can do like Adeline's Mama and go elsewhere. I do not see vaccinating and RIC as the same. I view one as protecting my children and others and the other as mutilation. Perhaps your views of vaccines would be different if your child had not suffered an adverse reaction/injury. I cannot argue that vaccinating doesn't alter the body, nor do I wish to, but I don't see them in the same category, either.

The way I interpreted the angry tone of "anti-vax" was in that the PP said, "10 die-hard anti-vax posters who will argue with anything that gets posted in the forum," NOT, "all people who do not vaccinate." It seemed as though her anger was directed towards those who will not allow her to have an open discussion, not all non-vaxxers.

The 10 same voices... yes, very true.  However that's their perogative and I for one would not want them to not be able talk about their beliefs.  I find that level of intolerance distasteful.  I know for fact AM did not say it the way YOU interpreted it. 

[Adaline'sMama]

I have zero problems with non-vaxers. In fact, we delayed until two and just now decided to get on schedule. My problem is just the fact that there is no real point in me asking any questions or discussing anything with anyone in the selective/delayed forum because 90% of the time what people get is a bunch of responses about how they shouldnt be vaxxing anyway. I want people to be able to express their opinion, but it's not really worth my time to post about DD's vaccinations because I already know what all the responses are going to be. 

[dogretro]

I'm not sure if you were "Yeah That" ing me or Imakcerka.

[emma1325]

Originally Posted by Imakcerka 

The 10 same voices... yes, very true.  However that's their perogative and I for one would not want them to not be able talk about their beliefs.  I find that level of intolerance distasteful.  I know for fact AM did not say it the way YOU interpreted it. 

I'm assuming YOU means me, correct?

I was only clarifying the fact that "anti-vaxxer" need not be a dirty word.

[emma1325]

Originally Posted by dogretro 

I'm not sure if you were "Yeah That" ing me or Imakcerka.

Quotes got a little confusing.  lol

[dogretro]

Yes, they did :) Anyhoodle, I do not take/use anti-vaxxer as any more positive or negative than pro-vaxxer. We all have our own interpretations of "where to draw the line" wrt what we are willing to do to and for our children. I like that MDC is a place where anyone who is super non-mainstream can come. I LIKE getting info like this. I may use it or not, but I want the experience and support that I find here :) If I want more mainstream, I can go anywhere else. 

[kathymuggle]

Emma, to address your points:

Originally Posted by emma1325 

but not pro-circumcision?

Don't get me wrong...I'm against genital mutilation and the positive - or even neutral - portrayal of it on mothering.com.  But let's examine the similarities between vaccination and routine infant circumcision:

- They're both medical interventions done to a healthy child

Agreed

- Neither is immediately necessary for medical reasons

Yes and no.  Some vaccines are for disease that actually circulate fairly often - chicken pox, flu, pertussis, rota - so a decision does have to be made by the parents, as the child is not old enough to make a decision.  Diseases that do not usually circulate are a little greyer - it would be hard to argue immediate medical necessity for a disease that does not circulate very often.

- They both alter the natural state of the body

agreed - and in both cases there is usually no medical need (i.e. the person is healthy when the injection or procedure is done)

- They both have risks, including the risk of death

yup

- They both have experts for and against the procedure

Yes - although I bet vaccines have more experts for it.

- There's scientific evidence used to support and reject both interventions

Yes, although there is probably more scientific arguments for vaccination than circ.  Not all decisions come down to science though

-They're both widely accepted - even pushed on parents - by the mainstream medical community (more so in the US for circ)

Agreed - much more so with vax where I live.  I would say circ is accepted where I live by mainstream doctors, but it is not pushed on anyone.

 I do agree with other posters though, that circ hurts everyone, while most people are not hurt (at least in a causative, quantifiable way) by vaccines. 

Edited by kathymuggle - 9/28/12 at 7:07am