or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › My son got the MMR and chicken pox vaccine but is having some kind of reaction? help!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

My son got the MMR and chicken pox vaccine but is having some kind of reaction? help! - Page 3

post #41 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post



Receiving a CP vaccine itself isn't necessarily the reason vaxed-for-CP teens have a higher rate of shingles. It may be because they are not re-exposed by their peers, or it may be because their immune systems are screwed up from receiving many vaccinations, or it may be something totally not vax-related, like junk food diet plus vitamin deficiency plus pesticide exposure.

 

the biggest thing that sets anyone up for shingles is unrelenting stress.

 

Yes, there is a much higher rate of shingles in vaccinated adolescents.  I believe the reason for that is that the chickenpox disease gives a much more solid immunity - and I'm not just talking about antibodies, but innate immunity as well, which also "remembers" in the same way as antibodies do.  The problem is that immunologists are still using the same tests as they did 60 years ago, and seem unable to see beyond that, therefore, they have no "tests" to test innate immunity.

 

If you find that unbelievable, read this:  From Stanford University:

 

http://stanmed.stanford.edu/2011summer/article7.html

 

Back to the topic though.  The antibody levels from the chickenpox vaccines are much lower than from the infection, and they drop much faster.  Adolescences is a hugely stressful time with adjustments to puberty, lots of peer pressure and stress at school, and now with Iphones and lots of other avenues to be bullied from, the stress lives are much higher than even 30 years ago.

 

Here is one link which shows this - much to their surprise ... http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/03/120301143426.htm

 

when you are under huge stress, your innate immune system crashes, and no amount of antibodies matter.  And if you don't believe me, then answer these questions:

 

Why do people with Herpes Simplex, who have constantly high levels of antibodies, constantly have break-outs?  and why is there no vaccine for that?

 

Answer, because antibodies don't mean jack anything with HS.  Only the innate immune system matters, and they know that a vaccine for HS would be useless.

 

And that's just the sort of storm, shingles thrives on.  Lots of stress, suppression of front line immune system, and the Herpes Zoster - as it becomes called, come crawling out of the nervous system and makes hay while the person's defences are disabled

 

In the past, it was older people, going through "mid life crises" or other stressful events who got shingles.  Now, the vaccine actually makes it easier for younger people to get it, because the immunity given by the vaccine, completely breaks the rules of solid immunity.

post #42 of 57

Haven't figured out how to use the multiquote thing.  Perhaps someone can point me to a tutor for the technologically ignorant somewhere... so I'll intersperse with red.

Quote:
Originally Posted by whompingwillow View Post

Thanks for the feedback, everyone.   

 

Seems like I am getting some conflicting information though, so not really sure what to think.

 

Who can tell you what to think.  But we can HELP you learn how to analyse the conflicts and think them out for yourself.  That is supposed to be what "education" is about, though sometimes I doubt it, because school never taught me how to think.. 

 

 I did know about exemptions but my main worry was about having to keep my son out of school during an outbreak. I mean what if there are two separate outbreaks? He could potentially miss months of school.  I will ask about getting a blood test done down the line to see if he is immune.  

 

Is it true that he is unlikely to have lifelong immunity since it was most likely caused by the vaccine? Like someone said earlier in the thread? 

 

Like I said earlier, my doctor does not accept patients that don't vaccinate on schedule and my husband is very pro vaccination.

 

If your husband is very pro-vaccine, ask him to hand to you the factual evidence upon which he made that choice.  If he has none, then his consent is either conformed or manufactured, not informed.  If he says, "Paul Offit", then ask if he's read his book called "Deadly Choices" and checked both the facts and the references?  If he has, then he would know that that book is a load of bollocks.

 

 He could *maybe* be convinced to do an alternative schedule but I haven't really found any reliable information that  alternate vs on schedule vaccination really has any benefits and we would have to find a new Dr. so that is where we are on that front.

 

You mean, like you've not found the medical profession has any reliable information about fever either?  which is true.  Absense of information, doesn't mean information is absent.  It just means that the person trying to convince you to do something either hasn't got the information or CHOSES not to give it to you...

 

Chicken pox was one of the vaccines I really didn't want him to get unless he hadn't acquired it naturally by 12 or 13 just because I didn't want him to have to get boosters in adulthood since CP can be so dangerous for adults. 

 

Chickenpox is only dangerous for IGNORANT adults, whose nutrition is crap and who have no idea how to deal with it.  Don't ever believe that ignorance is bliss, because when it comes to disease, ignorance = fear = bombed in immune system = possible bad outcome.

 

I'm also getting conflicting information about fevers, but I do know I would give tylenol way before it got to the 107 mark, that just seems incredibly high

 

It's highly unlikely that your child would ever throw a 107 fever.

 

. I have never heard of anyone having a fever that high and my son would be at an ER before it got to that point.  I believe my pediatrician admits any child with a fever above 104 to the ER to check for infections and meningitis, as a precaution

 

 

 

In that case my older son would have been admitted about five times in his first ten years, because he always threw a 105 fever for about 8 hours.  By the time I'd have figured out what I was going to do, I'd go to do it, and he'd be gone and his temperature normal.

 

On the other hand, our younger son would throw a 101 fever for three days.  if he threw a 104 fever it would last about 10 - 12 hours.

 

In our house it seemed the higher the fever, the shorter the duration.

 

Fever never bothers me at all.  What would bother me, was a pale, flaccid, limp child, with clammy skin, that didn't respond to question, and who broke out with red spots which when a glass, or sheet of mylar was pressed on them, didn't disappear...

 

But I've never had to deal with that, and neither should any parent have to deal with it, who knows how to feed their children, and how to look after the first symptoms of anything that looks like an infection.

 

The key to getting rid of your fear of infection, is to learn what the infections are, learn about how the front line immune system works, and make sure your child's nutrition is spot-on.

post #43 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alenushka View Post

The reason I would go to the doctor is to make sure it is not something else. Just because someone  was vaccinated, it does not mean the fever and rash is reaction to vaccine. One can get some other illness as well. As my old professor used to say, " A patient can have as many damn illness as he wants"

 

if your whining kid with a 102 fever and spots was building with bricks, chasing the cat, and trying to imitate birds out the window, would you still go to the doctor?

 

I mean, at what point does a parent put their brain into gear and assess that thing called "need" as opposed to "fear and ignorance"?

post #44 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Momtezuma Tuatara View Post

if your whining kid with a. 102 fever and spots was building with bricks, chasing the cat, and trying to imitate birds out the window, would you still go to the doctor?

I mean, at what point does a parent put their brain into gear and assess that thing called "need" as opposed to "fear and ignorance"?

For me, yes we still go to the doctor in that situation. Not because I'm in any particular fear for my child - dude, so many possible rashes in the world - but for the following reasons:

- I want a definitive identification on the rash. Vax reaction? Breakthrough CP? Teething? Allergies? Hand foot and mouth? Why would I screw around with guessing and so on when I could at least start to find out?

- How do I think the friends coming to brunch feel about being exposed to a toddler with chicken pox, as apposed to being exposed to a toddler who maybe is allergic to my new laudry soap? How about the other parents who use the church nursery? We participate in a community that we have at least some resposibility towards.

- my kids go to daycare, and the nice ladies there are not going to be all chill about a kid with a rash, even if that kid is doing fine and the fever is gone. They're going to want to know what it is, and that the pediatrician saw it. So before I plan to go to work, I ha d better plan for my kid to physically see a doctor.
post #45 of 57

1)  friends shouldn't be coming to brunch where a kid has any infection or is off colour for any reason period.  To do that under those circumstances would be irresponsible.

 

2) Ditto re day care.

 

 

Quote:
- I want a definitive identification on the rash. Vax reaction? Breakthrough CP? Teething? Allergies? Hand foot and mouth? Why would I screw around with guessing and so on when I could at least start to find out?

 

3) "At least?"  At the very least you could use google scholar and see if you could learn a thing or two using your own brain.  How does a parent actually learn (for themselves) the difference between guessing, and being spoon fed?

 

Also, you are assuming that the doctor actually knows the diagnosis.  The irony is, that half the time they just shrug and say, "Oh, it's just a virus, now can I give you antibiotics?" duh.gif

 

Years ago, when our older son had rubella (shock horror does that still exist?) the doctor scratched his head and thought he had an allergic reaction to grass.  it was a retired nurse who felt the glands were up in the back of his neck, saw koplik spots in his mouth and agreed with me that it could be rubella....

 

There is nothing complicated about what this child has, and it sure ain't hand foot and mouth disease!

 

That's obvious, just from the evidence provided. 

post #46 of 57

I can find pictures of about a million rashes on the internet, and I can guess all day.  I see a lot of rashes, and I get turned away from daycare on Monday.  I need to preserve my sick time for kids who are genuinely sick, as opposed to kids who got bit up by chiggers (a condition commonly mistaken for CP). 

 

I do not find internet research productive for health issues in the short term.  There's a huge volume of information available, limited indexing, and no gatekeeping whatsoever.  You can spend tons of time sifting through it, piece by piece, and trying to figure out which of that information you trust.  Because this is a time-consuming task, by the time you've sorted, your kid will probably be fine (most kids are fine).  Alternatively, you'll be interrupted by an ER trip. 

 

You can ask people you know and trust - this is a really common strategy, and I am sure that most parents here have, from time to time, asked a question from someone who's been through whatever they're going through.  It's quick, but it's basically a judgment about your source, not about their information.  Enlisting an expert is a version of that, but it's not "some other mom" it's the pediatrician.  In both of these latter cases, most people are judging their relationship, not the information, but you can certainly make use of a pediatrician without suspending your own critical faculties.  Consultation is not the same as unwavering obedience. 

 

And sure, they might be stumped.  That happens to everyone sometimes.  Stumped is not the same as useless.

post #47 of 57

On the basis of the photographs put up, there is no way that's a chigger attack LOL...

 

And what do you mean by "genuinely sick" anyway?  I got a chigger bite in USA in 1993, did what I was told -  and within days I was in big trouble, and sorted it out my way, to the horror of my hosts... chigger bites aren't inconsequential, particularly if all you do is seal them off! LOL.

 

In the case of paediatricians, "stumped" is the equivalent of useless, until such time as stumped becomes a sensible accurate answer.

 

With chickenpox rashes, even vaccine chickenpox spots...., it's utterly obvious ....  except to a totally blind person.

 

The people who most accurately diagnose whooping cough, are grandmothers not blinded by medical dogma and rhetoric, who are well keyed into hearing it from decades back when people listened and learned.  Today, paediatricians look at the fact that your kid is vaccinated, and wriggel and squirm, trying to find every possible other excuse, rather than do a PCR test and risk finding out that it's actually whooping cough in a vaccinated child.

 

Looking, listening and learning , is the best way to become an diagnostically "effective" parent, for those who chose to do that.

 

Hey, it takes all sorts.  if you'd rather put money into constantly putting the responsibility on a paediatrician to decide whether or not your kid is genuinely sick, that's your choice and your paediatrician's bank account will be continually, eternally grateful.   After all the secret of success is to create patient dependency.

 

What I don't like about that, is that every time that happens, you run the risk of being "offered" extra add-ons which of course, your insurance company will pay for.... but then, many parents just love all the add-ones.  Such is life.

post #48 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by MeepyCat View Post

  You can spend tons of time sifting through it, piece by piece, and trying to figure out which of that information you trust.  Because this is a time-consuming task, by the time you've sorted, your kid will probably be fine (most kids are fine).  Alternatively, you'll be interrupted by an ER trip. 

 

 

 

Yes you will land up in a mess... ,.... IF you spent no time working out key search terms, learning how to limit search frames which accurately eliminates the dross.

 

Here's the key to not getting in that situation....  You do your homework about the key things affecting children before the child gets sick. 

 

Is that possible?

 

Yes.  Us oldies here are living proof.  I have never been caught out, knowing nothing, and floundering around, crying in my knickers, because I haven't a clue...  And that's right from the days when there was no internet.  It can be done.

 

The point of Mothering isn't to create professional dependency. 

 

The point of Mothering, has always been the encouragement, and building up of people who want to become personally knowledgeable and as independent as possible with a very broad knowledge base and an ability to quickly find the answers they need when crunch time comes.  There are many here, who know how to do that.

 

What I want to do, is encourage the OP to become just such a parent..

post #49 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Momtezuma Tuatara View Post

 

 

 

The point of Mothering isn't to create professional dependency. 

 

 

yeahthat.gif

post #50 of 57

I've had a flag on this thread.

Just poking my head in and asking every one to stay respectful. No matter how 'right' you believe/know/think you are - we all need to deal with each other respectfully...or....just move along.  No need to be snarky in making your point, right?

Have a good evening - any questions or problems feel free to flag or PM me. smile.gif

post #51 of 57
Thread Starter 

Hi everyone! Thought I would give an update. 

 

So I decided not to take my son to the Doctor because on Monday it looked a ton better. The spots had faded, he was acting and eating just fine, did not have a fever, and was not acting like he was uncomfortable.  If it had looked worse or did not look like it was improving I would have brought him in. 

 

So from the research online I think it was a vaccine induced case of the chicken pox. Mainly because he wasn't scratching at all and I don't think that is typical of chicken pox that is caught naturally. You guys know a lot more about this stuff than I do so please correct me if I am wrong! 

 

As per my husband, not vaccinating is not an option. His father died from Hepatitis when my husband was in college and his aunt has to walk with a cane due to complications from Polio.  So just like some of you would never budge on not vaccinating because of reactions your kids have had, there is no convincing my husband that vaccines do more harm than good. 

 

It is what it is I suppose...

post #52 of 57

It is what it is.

 

Non-vaccinators make their beds and lie in them too.

post #53 of 57

Glad things are better! Did you let your doctor know, so she can make a report to VAERS?  Before your child is due for boosters, you can also ask for titers (a blood test showing antibodies, so you know whether or not you are immune) for MMR, and chicken pox.  I would do this even if you have to pay cash for the blood work--if your child is already fully immune at booster time, then there is absolutely no need for the booster, even if you are pro-vaccine.  And no booster would be vastly preferable to a shot that may have already caused a reaction.

 

As far as your husband insisting on vaccines, perhaps a do-able compromise would involve doing vaccines--but never more than one at a time, and never those that are obviously unnecessary or untested. You can show him the Cochrane research on the flu shot, as well as the package insert, which states that efficacy has never been shown in pediatric populations.  Did your father-in-law die of hepatitis A, B, or C, and how was it acquired?  That's actually kind of important to know.  

post #54 of 57
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post

Glad things are better! Did you let your doctor know, so she can make a report to VAERS?  Before your child is due for boosters, you can also ask for titers (a blood test showing antibodies, so you know whether or not you are immune) for MMR, and chicken pox.  I would do this even if you have to pay cash for the blood work--if your child is already fully immune at booster time, then there is absolutely no need for the booster, even if you are pro-vaccine.  And no booster would be vastly preferable to a shot that may have already caused a reaction.

 

As far as your husband insisting on vaccines, perhaps a do-able compromise would involve doing vaccines--but never more than one at a time, and never those that are obviously unnecessary or untested. You can show him the Cochrane research on the flu shot, as well as the package insert, which states that efficacy has never been shown in pediatric populations.  Did your father-in-law die of hepatitis A, B, or C, and how was it acquired?  That's actually kind of important to know.  

 

I will ask to titers for MMR and chicken pox before he needs the next set of boosters. 

 

The nurse told me that the rash was a normal reaction to the vaccine and won't cause any long term problems so I'm guessing I don't have a reason to report it as a reaction. 

 

I was kind of skimming the peanut thread and was wondering if my son's allergic reaction to strawberries has anything to do with a certain vaccine? We gave him some chopped strawberries when he was about 10 months old and he broke out in a huge rash. I did take him to the Dr. for that one and she just told me to hold off on introducing them again until he is 18 months old and that the rash was almost certainly caused by the strawberries.  I just found it strange because there is no history of food allergies on either side of our families (although my husband does have bad season allergies). 

post #55 of 57

I wouldn't think that the strawberry reaction was necessarily caused by vaccines unless he was vaccinated a short time before the reaction.

 

If that was the case, and if he had received a vaccine that contained an adjuvant (aluminum sulfate), the adjuvant would cause his immune system to have a stronger reaction to the antigen in the vaccine--with no way of controlling whether the immune system has a stronger reaction to something else, like strawberries which, by the way, are one of the top allergens, and are much more likely to cause a reaction if given to an infant.  That's why the usual recommendation to avoid things like strawberries, shellfish, and peanuts until age 2.

 

But, even if he had received a vaccine the day before the strawberry reaction, there is unfortunately no way to tell for sure whether the vaccine caused the reaction, exacerbated the reaction, or if he would have reacted to the strawberries no matter what.

post #56 of 57
Thread Starter 

I thought the AAP reversed its policy and now says that introducing children to allergy prone foods before 1 actually decreases their chance of having an allergy? 

 

"New scientific data suggests that early introduction of highly allergenic foods—such as milk, eggs, peanuts, soy, and shellfish—may reduce children’s risk for developing food allergies, according to new recommendations from the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology (AAAAI), published in Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice.

The recommendations are a dramatic reversal of American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) guidelines issued in 2000, which advise delaying milk until high-risk kids reach age 1; eggs until age 2; and peanuts, shellfish, tree nuts, and fish to age 3." 

This is why we introduced these foods before he turned 1.  Is this outdated now? 

post #57 of 57

I think the AAP makes a lot of blanket recommendations based on extremely limited information.  In other words, they jump to conclusions.

 

They made that recommendation after looking at a study comparing rates of peanut-allergic children in the UK and Israel. The Israeli kids were fed peanut-containing snacks at a much earlier age, and had a far lower incidence of peanut allergy. They jumped to the very unscientific conclusion that this means that you should feed your kids highly allergenic foods at an earlier age.

 

They did not look at the number/timing/formulas of vaccines given, which might affect autoimmune reactions to foods.  There is some evidence that some vaccines may have been manufactured with excipients derived from peanut oil, and this information has been withheld from the public because the manufacturers are not required to divulge excipient ingredient.  Some researchers are suspecting that these excipients might be linked with the exploding rate of peanut allergy.     

 

They did not look at where the peanuts were grown and manufactured, nor what chemicals, such as herbicides, pesticides, etc., were used. These, too, can have an enormous effect on allergic reaction rates.

 

They didn't compare kinds of peanuts used, nor what other differences there might be.


They didn't compare any other environmental differences, but looked only at peanut consumption.

 

They certainly didn't look at strawberries.

 

 Another thing to consider with strawberries is whether or not they are organic.  A bit off-topic, but worth a read:  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-jonny-bowden/the-organic-food-lie_b_1866043.html

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Vaccinations
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › My son got the MMR and chicken pox vaccine but is having some kind of reaction? help!