or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Vaccinations Debate › Non-Vaxing and Vaxing Parents
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Non-Vaxing and Vaxing Parents - Page 5

post #81 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by EineMutti View Post
 

 

And if the non-vaxxer thinks that vaccinating is the best thing for the community, but they just don't want to take the risk for themselves, than that is selfish and no moral high ground can be claimed. Nothing wrong with that, either. Not all decisions have to made with the global community in mind. 

I would like to point out that even when a selective/delayer thinks a vaccine might be a good idea for their child or even for society, they are often unable to vaccinate.  

 

If a measles vaccine was available separately from MMR, I might have gone for it (or not - I am a little up in the air on it).  However there is no separate measles vaccine, is there?  While I would not do tetanus, a number of people would - once again there is no tetanus-only choice.

 

In some states and countries it is easier to be non-vax than selective-delayed in terms of government paperwork.

 

It is annoying beyond belief when someone wants to vaccinate, but can't and then others turn around and point fingers (not saying you are doing this, I am speaking in general)

post #82 of 110

Here, you can get separate vaccines. In Edinburgh, that is almost two hours away and you would have to pay privately. Not really an option for everyone, but I know some people who did it. the NHS covers selective and delayed vaccines only if this is medically necessary. We would have got it for free, I think, but not anymore, as DS isn't at such a high risk anymore. 

 

After giving this whole morality issue another thought, and read some more on morality (I studied the sociology of morality a few years ago, it was amazingly interesting), it's really not that simple.

 

BOTH sides act morally according to their information and all facts are chosen facts. It is quite impossible to put one group to a higher morality level than the other if both are convinced that they are doing the right thing for EVERYONE. 

 

Vaxxers can easily say their choice is more moral and back this up. But so can non-vaxxers.

 

Morality just means that your choice is based on the question: "What if everyone did this?" "What would be the global consequences?"

 

Non-vaxxers seem to firmly believe that most vaccines are not necessary and actually harmful, so their decision is just as righteous. The fact that I personally disagree with people who don't vaccinate wouldn't give me the right to deem their choice immoral.

 

(Unless they spread diseases deliberately through organised parties, but as PP said, that is another issue. Clear line.)

post #83 of 110
Thread Starter 

Here's a good example of why I am chosing not to vaccinate. What if, such a big 'if', my child was one of these poor souls who have a deadly reaction? I would rather take the risk, properly nourish them, keep them clean, happy and healthy, rather than something like this happen.

 

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/57169475-78/webb-flu-son-effects.html.csp

 

I have received 1 flu shot in the past. Call is coincidence if you'd like, but I was sick for a week about a week following. I have not gotten one since. I am also learning to eat better and use more natural means of helping myself when I am sick. So far this year, just sniffles, and I attribute those to my stage in pregnancy.

 

To be honest, I cannot remember the last time I was sick, especially to the point of needing to see a doctor.

 

Another secret? I wash my hands, but never with soap and I don't use sanitizer either. I don't know how many colds/flus/germs (working at a children's museum) I have been exposed to, but I haven't been healthier. Some may think this is disgusting, but I think it's realistic, as goes to show, I havent been sick in an office that's all been sick.

post #84 of 110

Not sanitising might actually benefit some healthy people in the long run (if there isn't something really nasty going round). Who really knows. For an immunocompromised child who has to stay and visit hospital all the time, they are life-savers.

 

I have very little faith in the "kindness of mother nature" considering viruses and bacterial infections. Or in the ability of the human immune system to be strengthened through exposure to diseases. Some of them are devastating for so many people. HIV, EBV, measles, RSV, ebola, smallpox, bird flu, typhus, leprosy, swine flu, rota, noro, Bolivian hemorrhagic fever, tuberculosis, plague, malaria, Spanish flu, cholera, diphtheria, etc, etc. Millions of people have been wiped out by them and I applaud people who invented vaccines and at least protect us against some of them.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandemic

 

This is one of the reasons why I vaccinate: justthevax.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/micha-is-dead.html

 

But to me, it isn't an article in the news, this is IRL reality. I know them.


Edited by EineMutti - 11/25/13 at 1:20pm
post #85 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by ModerateMom View Post
 

I don't really think of vaccinating as being altruistic, I think of it more as participating in a social contract.  Vaccines work best for everyone when the highest # of people who can be vaccinated are vaccinated.  It's better for my kids, it's better for your kids, it's better for kids who can't be vaccinated, it's better for everyone.  My kids are of course my top priority, but if there's no obvious reason not to vaccinate them, it's my duty (in my opinion) as a mother and as a citizen to do it.

God I have been reading this thread after a much needed several week hiatus from this place and statements like this make me want to vomit. It is so easy for someone who believes there is minimal risk involved with vaccinating to hop on the "It's my duty as a citizen" bandwagon. It's such an easy way to toot your own horn and congratulate yourself on how you are participating in the social contract. All you posters that have said this (and you are all provaxers) can you try and imagine this scenario. You know your priority if first and formost to your own children - that is not to say that you do not care deeply about other children or humanity as a whole. But lets say society is asking you to do something that you believe in your soul is harmful to your child. Would you do it? Let me answer for you NO. The above only applies to those who believe vaccines are beneficial and their safety far outweighs their risks. I don't believe vaccines are better for my kids your kids or any kids and I have many obvious (to me anyway) reasons not to vaccinate them which is why I don't!. I participate in the social contract in plenty of other ways.

post #86 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marnica View Post
 

 above only applies to those who believe vaccines are beneficial and their safety far outweighs their risks. I don't believe vaccines are better for my kids your kids or any kids and I have many obvious (to me anyway) reasons not to vaccinate them which is why I don't!. I participate in the social contract in plenty of other ways.

 

I am pro-vax, but this exactly what I said, too. Non-vaxxers don't seem to believe that it benefits anyone, therefore THEIR decision is just as morally acceptable as the decision to vaccinate. 

 

I haven't come across a non-vaxxer of a healthy child who says: "I know the benefits outweigh the risks, everyone should vaccinate and take the miniscule side effect risk. Everyone but ME and MY children, we will just rely on herd immunity". 

 

For the pro-vaxxers, who cannot have their child vaccinated because the child is too sick, non-vaxxing LOOKS selfish and immoral. Or for the mums of newborns, whose babies got infected by measles from non-vaxxed kids and are now dying of SSPE, it LOOKS selfish, too. Those parents can't be blamed for having those thoughts. 

 

But the decision not to vaccinate is usually made after a long, thoughtful process and idea that not vaccinating benefits society. 

post #87 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marnica View Post
 

God I have been reading this thread after a much needed several week hiatus from this place and statements like this make me want to vomit. It is so easy for someone who believes there is minimal risk involved with vaccinating to hop on the "It's my duty as a citizen" bandwagon. It's such an easy way to toot your own horn and congratulate yourself on how you are participating in the social contract. All you posters that have said this (and you are all provaxers) can you try and imagine this scenario. You know your priority if first and formost to your own children - that is not to say that you do not care deeply about other children or humanity as a whole. But lets say society is asking you to do something that you believe in your soul is harmful to your child. Would you do it? Let me answer for you NO. The above only applies to those who believe vaccines are beneficial and their safety far outweighs their risks. I don't believe vaccines are better for my kids your kids or any kids and I have many obvious (to me anyway) reasons not to vaccinate them which is why I don't!. I participate in the social contract in plenty of other ways.

 

What really floors me about your telling me that I make you want to vomit is that you actually seem to agree with me.  If you DID believe that vaccines were better for your kids and my kids and everyone, then you would do the same exact thing I did, which was to vaccinate your kids.  I actually was trying to say that I don't really think of it as an "altruistic" thing, I think of it as science that works if everyone who can participate does.  That is MY belief, and I act accordingly.  Naturally if your belief differs then your behavior differs, and I'm not judging that.  I'm so glad your differing belief doesn't make ME want to vomit or someone around here would have an awful lot of cleaning up to do.

post #88 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by ModerateMom View Post
 

I think of it as science that works if everyone who can participate does.  

Unfortunately, the "science" doesn't work as advertised, because the pharmaceutical industry has lied about both the safety and effectiveness of vaccines, as well as the safety and efficacy of Tamiflu, and many, many other medications whose sales ride on fear-mongering put out by...the pharmaceutical industry.

In case anyone could possibly believe that vaccine manufacturers have been honest:

http://www.ethics.harvard.edu/lab/featured/325-jlme-symposium

post #89 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post
 

Unfortunately, the "science" doesn't work as advertised, because the pharmaceutical industry has lied about both the safety and effectiveness of vaccines, as well as the safety and efficacy of Tamiflu, and many, many other medications whose sales ride on fear-mongering put out by...the pharmaceutical industry.

In case anyone could possibly believe that vaccine manufacturers have been honest:

http://www.ethics.harvard.edu/lab/featured/325-jlme-symposium

Vaccines are in fact effective through herd immunity, which is why it's important for everyone who can be vaccinated to do so. 

post #90 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post
 

 

I don't think vaccinating is an altruist act, however.  I think it is a presonal act done to safeguard (if one beleives vaccines safeguard) the health of ones own children. 

 

This is just my two cents on this topic.  I think it depends. Obviously, if there is a major outbreak of a serious disease and I vaccinate my child for it, I don't consider that to be altruistic per se. 

 

Vaccinating for the MMR, for example, I think is altruistic (at least for me).  I know that *currently* living in the US my son is very very unlikely to die from measles. I don't think there has been a death in what? 20 years? He is more likely to die from falling out of the bed at this point in time than from measles.  I also know that if too many people think that way, that's no longer going to be true.  It kind of reminds me of people that say "well, my one vote isn't going to make a difference!" during elections.  Yeah, you're probably right that your one vote isn't likely to make a difference. But when you have millions of people that say that exact same thing, it *does* make a difference. So I vaccinate my son for the MMR because I know that that low risk of death will only last if the vast majority of people in a community are immune to a disease.  Ditto Polio and diphtheria. 

 

If the MMR was split up, I would still vaccinate my son for rubella, too.  I know that rubella is a very mild childhood illness, but it can be devastating for pregnant women and I would want to do my part in making sure my son doesn't inadvertently spread it to someone who is pregnant. I think that's an altruistic way of thinking as well. 

 

Ones I don't think of as necessarily being "altruistic" might include vaccines like Hib. That disease scares the heck out of me. But it's not so common and contagious that I think I am doing the community a huge favor by vaccinating my son for it (at least I think I've read that generally Hib is not a very contagious disease).  Tentanus is another example. I know I'm not helping the community at large by vaccinating my son for it, I'm doing it because it also scares the crap out of me.  

 

I could go on, but I think you get the idea. 

post #91 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by ModerateMom View Post
 

Vaccines are in fact effective through herd immunity, which is why it's important for everyone who can be vaccinated to do so. 

how do you explain disease that have been eliminated without vaccinating the herd?

 

and with the pertussis study that just came out - http://www.mothering.com/community/t/1393501/brand-new-pertussis-study-let-us-discuss#post_17517806 how well is the herd thing really working with this vaccine?

post #92 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by serenbat View Post
 

how do you explain disease that have been eliminated without vaccinating the herd?

 

and with the pertussis study that just came out - http://www.mothering.com/community/t/1393501/brand-new-pertussis-study-let-us-discuss#post_17517806 how well is the herd thing really working with this vaccine?

 

Which diseases are you talking about specifically? Bubonic plague? Because that one isn't generally transmitted from person to person, it's through fleas.  So in this case sanitation and rat control measures are generally responsible for the drop in cases. But it certainly hasn't been "eliminated".  Thousands of people every year still get the bubonic plague.  There are even certain parts of the US that report cases every year.  " In recent decades, an average of 7 human plague cases are reported each year (range: 1-17 cases per year). Plague has occurred in people of all ages (infants up to age 96), though 50% of cases occur in people ages 12–45. Worldwide, between 1,000 and 2,000 cases each year are reported to the World Health OrganizationExternal Web Site Icon (WHO), though the true number is likely much higher. " http://www.cdc.gov/plague/faq/#cases 

 

So to flip this question around, why do you think the vast majority of diseases *haven't* been completely eliminated? Measles, for example, has been around since the 7th century. Do you really think it's just a coincidence that the US went from millions of people getting measles a year to an average of 60 a year after the introduction of the vaccine? 
 
 
 
post #93 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by serenbat View Post
 

how do you explain disease that have been eliminated without vaccinating the herd?

 

and with the pertussis study that just came out - http://www.mothering.com/community/t/1393501/brand-new-pertussis-study-let-us-discuss#post_17517806 how well is the herd thing really working with this vaccine?

 

Do you think that because herd immunity difficult to accomplish for Pertussis that it means that herd immunity hasn't been successful with other vaccines? 

post #94 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

First I said eliminated not eradicated.  how do you explain disease that have been eliminated without vaccinating the herd?

 

Which diseases are you talking about specifically? Bubonic plague? typhoid, cholera, scarlatina, yellow fever (yes, the US use to have this too) and measles were also on the decline prior to the vaccination to name a few  Because that one isn't generally transmitted from person to person, it's through fleas.  So in this case sanitation and rat control measures are generally responsible for the drop in cases. But it certainly hasn't been "eliminated".  Thousands of people every year still get the bubonic plague.  There are even certain parts of the US that report cases every year.  " In recent decades, an average of 7 human plague cases are reported each year (range: 1-17 cases per year). Plague has occurred in people of all ages (infants up to age 96), though 50% of cases occur in people ages 12–45. Worldwide, between 1,000 and 2,000 cases each year are reported to the World Health OrganizationExternal Web Site Icon (WHO), though the true number is likely much higher. " http://www.cdc.gov/plague/faq/#cases 

 

So to flip this question around, why do you think the vast majority of diseases *haven't* been completely eliminated? Measles, for example, has been around since the 7th century. Do you really think it's just a coincidence that the US went from millions of people getting measles a year to an average of 60 a year after the introduction of the vaccine? 
 
 
ETA- Gonorrhoea and syphilis rates have also decline, that has nothing to do fleas either. And if this is about herd vaccination the assumption that it can only be done through having the heard vaccinated simply is not accurate.

so how well is the polio vaccine working out? now in Syria (who had near 90% vaccination rate pre-conflict) they doing booster for polio  - I did start a thread about this - I would like to know how PRO vaccers feel on this happening here.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by ModerateMom View Post
 

 

Do you think that because herd immunity difficult to accomplish for Pertussis that it means that herd immunity hasn't been successful with other vaccines? 

I assume you were not able to answer the questions I asked of you so you thought it would just ask me instead :rotflmao 


Edited by serenbat - 12/2/13 at 6:51pm
post #95 of 110

Yellow fever is transmitted by mosquitos.  Environmental controls have eradicated it from the US.  Cholera is transmitted via contaminated water.  Eliminated from the US via sanitation and water treatment.  Typhoid is transmitted via contaminated food (salmonella), and it is most definitely not eradicated, in the US or elsewhere.  Not sure why you think it is.  Scarlet fever is cause by Group A strep, and again is most definitely not eradicated in the US.

 

And measles mortality, not incidence, was on the decline before the vaccine (thanks to better supportive medical care).

post #96 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by serenbat View Post
 

so how well is the polio vaccine working out? now in Syria (who had near 90% vaccination rate pre-conflict) they doing booster for polio  - I did start a thread about this - I would like to know how PRO vaccers feel on this happening here.

I assume you were not able to answer the questions I asked of you so you thought it would just ask me instead :rotflmao

 

Well, teacozy answered your first question before I had a chance to, and I did answer your second question,  so :rotflmao  right back atcha.  :thumb

post #97 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by ModerateMom View Post
 

 

Well, teacozy answered your first question before I had a chance to, and I did answer your second question,  so :rotflmao  right back atcha.  :thumb NOPE you simply asked me another question!  remember this was your reply?  :laughDo you think that because herd immunity difficult to accomplish for Pertussis that it means that herd immunity hasn't been successful with other vaccines? 

 

 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chknlovr View Post
 

Yellow fever is transmitted by mosquitos.  Environmental controls have eradicated it from the US.  Cholera is transmitted via contaminated water.  Eliminated from the US via sanitation and water treatment.  Typhoid is transmitted via contaminated food (salmonella), and it is most definitely not eradicated, in the US or elsewhere.  Not sure why you think it is.  Because I didn't say eradicated, you did. Scarlet fever is cause by Group A strep, and again is most definitely not eradicated in the US.

 

And measles mortality, not incidence, was on the decline before the vaccine (thanks to better supportive medical care).

Yellow fever is can be spread from human to human once infected.                    The US doesn't vaccinated for this and we once did have it here and it killed thousands. http://www.cdc.gov/yellowfever/transmission/index.html 

  • In Africa, an intermediate (savannah) cycle exists that involves transmission of virus from mosquitoes to humans living or working in jungle border areas. In this cycle, the virus can be transmitted from monkey to human or from human to human via mosquitoes

Yellow fever virus has three transmission cycles: jungle (sylvatic), intermediate (savannah), and urban.

Typhoid is also spread by humans handling food - not as simple as say it's just contaminated food like you make it seem, again we don't vaccinate here for it.

http://www.cdc.gov/nczved/divisions/dfbmd/diseases/typhoid_fever/#spreading

Salmonella Typhi lives only in humans. Persons with typhoid fever carry the bacteria in their bloodstream and intestinal tract. In addition, a small number of persons, called carriers, recover from typhoid fever but continue to carry the bacteria. Both ill persons and carriers shed Salmonella Typhi in their feces (stool). 

You can get typhoid fever if you eat food or drink beverages that have been handled by a person who is shedding Salmonella Typhi or if sewage contaminated with Salmonella Typhi bacteria gets into the water you use for drinking or washing food. 

http://www.niaid.nih.gov/topics/scarletfever/Pages/transmission.aspx You can get scarlet fever through direct contact with mucus from the throat, fluid from the nose, or saliva of an infected person.

 

Yellow fever, typhoid, cholera and scarletina have all been virtually eliminated in the US without vaccinating the herd! The few case of typhoid that the US reports are reported to have been contracted outside of the US. 

 

 

again, I did not say eradicated but the numbers are so small we are not vaccinating the herd here for these disease and we are not having the numbers that we once did, not even close

 

we are hearing more and more about disease we are vaccinating the herd for and having "outbreaks" of them!

post #98 of 110
On yellow fever. It can be spread from human to human VIA MOSQUITOES. During that intermediate stage it can also spread from nonhuman primate to human primate VIA MOSQUITOES. At no point can it spread directly from human to human. It was eliminated from the US by controlling the mosquito that spreads it. End of story.

Diseases spread by animal vectors and fecal/oral route are simple to control/eliminate with limited vaccination and modern stable infrastructure. If the US infrastructure collapsed, we'd have cholera and typhoid back in a heartbeat.
post #99 of 110

Thank you, Katie.  Beat me to it.

 

I'm not sure how Serenbat can put up that whole diagram, look at it, and still think that yellow fever is transmitted human to human.

post #100 of 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by serenbat View Post
 

 

Originally Posted by ModerateMom View Post
 

 

Well, teacozy answered your first question before I had a chance to, and I did answer your second question,  so :rotflmao  right back atcha.  :thumb NOPE you simply asked me another question!  remember this was your reply?  :laughDo you think that because herd immunity difficult to accomplish for Pertussis that it means that herd immunity hasn't been successful with other vaccines?

 

I'm aware of my reply.  You asked how herd immunity was working with the pertussis vaccine, and I acknowledged that it's difficult to accomplish herd immunity though that vaccine.  How is that not answering the question?

 

Also, your chart illustrates how yellow fever is actually not transmitted human to human, and the text you copied, pasted, (and bolded!) says it outright...it's transmitted via mosquitoes. 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Vaccinations Debate
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Vaccinations Debate › Non-Vaxing and Vaxing Parents