or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Vaccinations Debate › The adult vaccine challenge
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The adult vaccine challenge

post #1 of 21
Thread Starter 
This is kind of a fluff debate but I have seen this being brought up recently in vaccine blog comments and had a few questions.

The challenge usually goes something like this : Take an adult adjusted vaccine dose of all the recommended childhood vaccines at once to prove their safety. Many times there is a monetary reward for doing so.

For those of you who are NVers, would this actually change your mind? If, say, a pediatrician agreed to it, and the vaccines were administered by an agreed upon professional, and the pediatrician suffered no ill effects would it change anything at all for you?

For those of us that are PVers, would you do it?

Just curious smile.gif
post #2 of 21
Quote:
For those of you who are NVers, would this actually change your mind? If, say, a pediatrician agreed to it, and the vaccines were administered by an agreed upon professional, and the pediatrician suffered no ill effects would it change anything at all for you?

 

 

No it wouldn't change anything for me. I don't give a sh!t what other people choose to do to their bodies. Knock yourself out. 

 

BTW, what do you classify as no ill effects? Not dropping dead within a few hours of the vaccines? What about developing an auto immune condition, or hyperthyroid condition a few months after vaccination? Cancer 10 years down the line? Or perhaps becoming psychotic like Michael Brabant? Who gets to decide what constitutes ill effects the NVIC? Dr Paul Offit? A committee made up of pharmaceutical company, CDC, AMA cronies? 

post #3 of 21
It wouldn't change anything at all. There's a big difference between an adult taking a vaccine and a two month old baby taking a vaccine, even if the dose is adjusted.

The only thing that would make a difference to me is no vaccine injured people, children or adults. One person who tolerates vaccines well proves nothing about how others in the population will tolerate it. It would just be a publicity stunt.
post #4 of 21
Thread Starter 
Alright, good to know smile.gif I figured it wouldn't change most AVers minds.

I think the best "test" as to their safety is the fact that the vast majority of doctors/immunologists give their own children the vaccines.

If they saw reactions left and right they wouldn't expose their own children to them.
post #5 of 21
Well, I'm not an "anti-vaxxer" and honestly I think those terms are divisive so I try to steer clear of them. I am not opposed to anyone vaxxing their kids. I just don't want to be forced or made to feel bad/stupid/irresponsible/foolish for my decisions.

The best evidence will always be found in the reactions suffered, regardless of who suffered them. Also, some may observe that a vaccine harmed their child while others will say it was a coincidence.
post #6 of 21

I'm a pro-vaxer and I wouldn't do the stunt because I'm up to date on my vaxes and don't need more.  I honestly don't believe anything terrible would happen to me if I did take a full dose of vaxes, but I'm not particularly interested in taking anything I don't need.  I don't think it would change anybody's mind, either.

post #7 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post

Alright, good to know smile.gif I figured it wouldn't change most AVers minds.

I think the best "test" as to their safety is the fact that the vast majority of doctors/immunologists give their own children the vaccines.

If they saw reactions left and right they wouldn't expose their own children to them.

 

Could you please provide data supporting this claim?  The doctors I know do a sel/del schedule on their own children.

post #8 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by chickabiddy View Post
 

I'm a pro-vaxer and I wouldn't do the stunt because I'm up to date on my vaxes and don't need more.  I honestly don't believe anything terrible would happen to me if I did take a full dose of vaxes, but I'm not particularly interested in taking anything I don't need.  I don't think it would change anybody's mind, either.

 

Neither am I .   I don't need a flu shot.  Or a hep A/B shot.  Or a pneumonia shot. Or a shingles vaccine.  Or another DTaP.  Or another MMR.  Or a meningitis shot.  Or Gardasil.  

 
But I'm sure the pharmaceutical industry would disagree with me.  So would the government committee consisting of paid representatives of the pharmaceutical industry.  So would the doctors who were educated by the pharmaceutical industry.
 
So do you believe that you need everything the government/pharmaceutical industry says you need?
post #9 of 21
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post

Could you please provide data supporting this claim?  The doctors I know do a sel/del schedule on their own children.

Sure.

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/116/5/e623.abstract

" Ninety-two percent of pediatricians followed the official immunization recommendations for their own children.

Conclusions. Ninety-three percent of the surveyed physicians agree with the current official vaccination recommendations and would apply them to their own children. However, the observation that 5% of nonpediatricians would not use Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccine if they had a child born in 2004 is unexpected and concerning. In contrast, both groups gave additional vaccines than those recommended to their own children. "
post #10 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 
 
Sure.

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/116/5/e623.abstract

" Ninety-two percent of pediatricians followed the official immunization recommendations for their own children.

Conclusions. Ninety-three percent of the surveyed physicians agree with the current official vaccination recommendations and would apply them to their own children. However, the observation that 5% of nonpediatricians would not use Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccine if they had a child born in 2004 is unexpected and concerning. In contrast, both groups gave additional vaccines than those recommended to their own children. "

 

It looks like these pediatricians were somewhat self-selected, in that they subscribe to an online monthly vaccination newsletter.

 

Quote:
An 11-question, Web- based survey with a total of 102 discrete answers was sent to 2070 Swiss physicians in October 2004. All physicians were subscribers to a nonprofit, Web-based expert network (InfoVac, www.infovac.ch) that distributes monthly newsletters and answers question within 2 days on immunization issues. The InfoVac network reaches >95% of pediatricians in Switzerland but <20% of general practitioners. 

 

infovac.ch doesn't appear impartial,

 

Quote:
This site has been certified by WHO 
as meeting all 
criteria of good practice 
for information on 
vaccinations. For more ...

 

From the WHO link:

 

 

Quote:

Vaccine Safety Net

Web sites that provide information on vaccine safety and that adhere to good information practices

While many quality web sites offer science-based information about vaccine safety, others may provide unbalanced and misleading information. This can lead to undue fears, particularly among parents and patients.

 
And we all knowUNICEF has a campaign out to defame anti-vax websites, including Mothering.com, so how objective a group of pediatricians did they survey?
 
This study that found that 4% of recent medical school graduates believe that immunizations do more harm than good and 15% doubt vaccines are safe and effective.
post #11 of 21

My brother actually did this, sort of. Not as a stunt, though. He is going into school as a paramedic and he has long since lost his immunization record. He needed to be considered up to date on his vaccinations for school, so yesterday he went to the clinic and got everything: Dtap, MMR, HepB, and like two other things. He seems fine, for the record. He didn't do it to prove a point, just because he's a young guy and it seemed silly to him to go into the doctor's office more times than needed.

 

I don't think there's any point in doing this as a gimmick, though. What kind of point are you going to prove with a sample size of one (you)? The vaccines on the market already have published large-scale studies with much larger populations samples that have shown them to be relatively safe. A stupid stunt like this is not needed. It's actually a bit disrespectful, I think, because doctors are really busy and healthcare is at a premium. Don't waste their time by getting gratuitous shots because you think it'll be cute. Immunizations are a serious matter and should be treated with some gravitas, I think.

post #12 of 21
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichelleZB View Post
 

My brother actually did this, sort of. Not as a stunt, though. He is going into school as a paramedic and he has long since lost his immunization record. He needed to be considered up to date on his vaccinations for school, so yesterday he went to the clinic and got everything: Dtap, MMR, HepB, and like two other things. He seems fine, for the record. He didn't do it to prove a point, just because he's a young guy and it seemed silly to him to go into the doctor's office more times than needed.

 

I don't think there's any point in doing this as a gimmick, though. What kind of point are you going to prove with a sample size of one (you)? The vaccines on the market already have published large-scale studies with much larger populations samples that have shown them to be relatively safe. A stupid stunt like this is not needed. It's actually a bit disrespectful, I think, because doctors are really busy and healthcare is at a premium. Don't waste their time by getting gratuitous shots because you think it'll be cute. Immunizations are a serious matter and should be treated with some gravitas, I think.

 

I don't see the point, either, but as far as I am aware the challenge still stands. 

 
I'd love to see this counter offer presented.  Drink a weight adjusted amount of breast milk/formula every 2 hours for 24 hours to prove it's safety. If you become violently ill, throw up, or can't complete the challenge, you must concede that breast milk is dangerous. 
 
Any takers? That would be over a gallon of milk every two hours.  Almost no one can actually drink a gallon of milk in one setting. If you don't have a weak stomach you can search "gallon milk challenge" on youtube to see people become violently ill trying to drink a gallon in under an hour.  
 
Drinking a gallon of water in one setting can cause brain damage and death. 
 
The poison is in the dose, not sure how many times this has to be illustrated! 
post #13 of 21
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirzam View Post
 

 

It looks like these pediatricians were somewhat self-selected, in that they subscribe to an online monthly vaccination newsletter.

 

 

infovac.ch doesn't appear impartial,

 

 

From the WHO link:

 

 

And we all knowUNICEF has a campaign out to defame anti-vax websites, including Mothering.com, so how objective a group of pediatricians did they survey?
 
This study that found that 4% of recent medical school graduates believe that immunizations do more harm than good and 15% doubt vaccines are safe and effective.

 

They used the InfoVac network because it reaches 95+ percent of all pediatricians in Switzerland. 

 
In virtually every country in the world, most pediatricians are going to be pro vaccine.  What kind of newsletter should they be sending them? Any vaccine newsletter than gets sent out to 95+ percent of pediatricians is going to be pro vaccine because that is what science and evidence tells us is the best and safest way to prevent infectious diseases. 
 
Do you have any evidence that 70+% of pediatricians in the US don't vaccinate their children? 
 
"This study that found that 4% of recent medical school graduates believe that immunizations do more harm than good and 15% doubt vaccines are safe and effective." 
 
Not sure why that link didn't open for me.  All that shows is that 96% of medical school graduates believe that immunizations do more good than harm.  The vast majority. 
 
There are a minority of scientists who don't believe in evolution and who don't think dinosaurs ever existed. There are historians who are holocaust deniers.  That doesn't mean we should ignore what the vast majority of scientists and evidence tells us is true. 
post #14 of 21
Great. Now we're being compared to Holocaust deniers. REALLY, Teacozy?? REALLY????
post #15 of 21
post #16 of 21
Thread Starter 

Nope, not comparing you to holocaust deniers.

 

Was making a point that there are minorities in many different branches of science/history that believe differently than what the majority does.  It shouldn't be used as evidence that that position is true. 

 

It was a response to the part I quoted about 4 percent of graduates believing vaccines do more harm than good. 

post #17 of 21
What it appears to be is a thinly veiled suggestion that people who don't vax are either uber religious or paranoid conspiracy theorists. Perhaps some are and perhaps some aren't. It really doesn't matter. Children are being injured. Are the parents of injured children denying science? Will they believe anything out of some perceived convenience?

The fact is that science at the moment is flawed. It is wrought with conflict of interest. Even my OB, a very scientifically minded man, was saying this the other day. I don't trust a lot of main stream science because history has shown me to be skeptical. And because no matter how many times I hear "vaccines have been proven safe" I keep hearing the parents who are saying their child was injured. I believe the parents. Call me crazy!!!
post #18 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post


Sure.

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/116/5/e623.abstract

" Ninety-two percent of pediatricians followed the official immunization recommendations for their own children.

Conclusions. Ninety-three percent of the surveyed physicians agree with the current official vaccination recommendations and would apply them to their own children. However, the observation that 5% of nonpediatricians would not use Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccine if they had a child born in 2004 is unexpected and concerning. In contrast, both groups gave additional vaccines than those recommended to their own children. "

 

I took a look at the vaccine schedule in Switzerland.  It does not include rota, Heps (except for high risk populations) CP until adolescence,  or yearly flu shots.  I wonder how many would question the schedule if those more controversial vaccines were given?  

 

I also think 7-8% of doctors either delaying vaccines for their own child and/or questioning the schedule is huge!  Of course, Swiss doctors=/=American doctors, but if the data is similar in the USA, that is pretty shocking.  Most doctors recommend close to 100% of patients vaccinate on schedule (assumption - but if we look at medical exemption rates I think it is correct)  yet 7% of them disagree with the schedule?? 

Quote:
 
 
The poison is in the dose, not sure how many times this has to be illustrated! 

The dose makes the poison is a very simplified argument.  Children can react quite differently to substances than adults, even after adjusting for weight. Lead is one example.  Here is an article if you like:

 

http://www.actionbioscience.org/environment/trautmann.html

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 
Do you have any evidence that 70+% of pediatricians in the US don't vaccinate their children? 
 
 

Who said this?


Edited by kathymuggle - 9/21/13 at 2:49pm
post #19 of 21
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post
 

 

I took a look at the vaccine schedule in Switzerland.  It does not include rota, Heps (except for high risk populations) CP until adolescence,  or yearly flu shots.  I wonder how many would question the schedule if those more controversial vaccines were given?  

 

I also think 7-8% of doctors either delaying vaccines for their own child and/or questioning the schedule is huge!  Of course, Swiss doctors=/=American doctors, but if the data is similar in the USA, that is pretty shocking.  Most doctors recommend close to 100% of patients vaccinate on schedule (assumption - but if we look at medical exemption rates I think it is correct)  yet 7% of them disagree with the schedule?? 

The dose makes the poison is a very simplified argument.  Children can react quite differently to substances than adults, even after adjusting for weight. Lead is one example.  Here is an article if you like:

 

http://www.actionbioscience.org/environment/trautmann.html

 

 

Who said this?

 

Per my link, it stated that " In contrast, both groups gave additional vaccines than those recommended to their own children. "  So they gave them additional vaccines that weren't on the schedule.

 

Now while they don't specify which vaccines those are, I think it's safe to assume pediatricians aren't giving their children smallpox and yellow fever vaccines routinely. It's much more likely they are giving them vaccines like chicken pox, rota, Hep B or the flu shot. 

 

"Children can react quite differently to substances than adults, even after adjusting for weight. Lead is one example." 

 

Yes lead is an excellent example of a substance that is harmless in small amounts but dangerous in larger ones.  See http://www.health.ny.gov/publications/2526.pdf 

 

Test Result in micrograms per deciliter (mcg/dL)

 

Next Steps
0-4 • There is very little lead in your child’s blood. 
• The average lead test result for young children is about 2 mcg/dL. 
5-9 • Your child has a little more lead than most children. 
• Talk with your doctor and local health department to find out how your child might have come into contact 
with lead, and ways to protect your child.
• Your doctor might want to test your child again in 3 to 6 months. 
10-14 • Your child’s lead level is high. A result of 10 or higher requires action.
• Your doctor and local health department will talk with you to help you find sources of lead, and ways you can 
protect your child. 
• Your child should be tested again in 1 to 3 months.
15-44 • Your child’s lead level is quite high. You and your doctor should act quickly.
• Talk with your doctor or nurse about your child’s diet, growth and development, and possible sources of lead. 
• Talk with your local health department about how to protect your child. They may visit your home to help you 
find sources of lead.
• If the lead level is 15 to 24, your child should be tested again in 1 to 3 months. 
• If the lead level is 25 to 44, your child should be tested again in 2 weeks to 1 month.
45 or higher
• Your child needs medical treatment right away. 
• Your doctor or health department will call you as soon as they get the test result. 
• Your child might have to stay in a hospital, especially if your home has lead.
• Your local health department will visit your home to help you find sources of lead. 
• Your child should not go back home until the lead sources are removed or fixed. 
• Your child needs to be tested again after treatment.

 

So small amounts are considered normal and nothing alarming.  In any event, if a baby has a higher than normal amount of lead in their blood work it is usually because of something in the baby's environment. Like pait in a house or contaminated water etc. So they are generally exposed to it everyday, not like vaccines. Lead in high amounts are dangerous for adults too so I am not sure what your point is. In fact, the amount of lead it takes for it to be a concern in adults is very similar to that of children.  

 

What Lead Levels are Considered Elevated in Adults?

  • At levels above 80 µg/dL, serious, permanent health damage may occur (extremely dangerous).
  • Between 40 and 80 µg/dL, serious health damage may be occuring, even if there are no symptoms (seriously elevated).
  • Between 25 and 40 µg/dL, regular exposure is occuring. There is some evidence of potential physiologic problems (elevated).
  • Between 10 and 25 µg/dL, lead is building up in the body and some exposure is occuring.

The typical level for U.S. adults is less than 10 µg/dL (mean = 3 µg/dL).

post #20 of 21

You have not answered the question on who said 70% of pediatricians do not vaccinate their children.  You are asking for evidence of something no one has said.  

 

I think you missed or ignored my point about lead being more dangerous fro children, even after adjusting for weight.  Babies and children are not just miniature adults - toxicity of ingredients can depend of life stage, and not just weight.

 

Another link:

 

http://www.toxicologyguide.com/932-metals/

 

"Ingested inorganic lead is absorbed more efficiently from the GI tract of children than that of adults, readily crosses the placenta, and in children penetrates the blood-brain barrier….
The nervous system is another important target tissue for lead toxicity, especially in infants and young children in whom the nervous system is still developing."
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Vaccinations Debate
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Vaccinations Debate › The adult vaccine challenge