Is there any advantage to waiting?

[illinoismommy]

One advantage to waiting until after two to have any vaccinations is that the brain is way more developed. But I wonder if the risks aren't just as high.... what if I wait until two to give vaccinations and then start and my child develops autistic symptoms?

For those of you who believe both that some vaccinations work, and that they may be the cause of a lot of health issues.... how do you decide what to do?

Is there any advantage safety-wise to waiting until after 2 and then taking your time with vaccinations?

[mom0810]

I think there IS an advantage to waiting, in that it gives you time to really research and decide what you want to do.

Also, I think that the more developed the blood/brain barrier, the better off the child is. I also think that spacing them out and not doing them all at once is very good.

We are delaying and selective vaxing, if at all. I've researched the diseases and the vaccines for them and will be doing only a select few, if any.

I think delaying until YOU feel right about it is the best answer. I don't think there is any magic age.

[gentlebirthmothr]

Originally Posted by mom0810

I think there IS an advantage to waiting, in that it gives you time to really research and decide what you want to do.

Also, I think that the more developed the blood/brain barrier, the better off the child is. I also think that spacing them out and not doing them all at once is very good.

We are delaying and selective vaxing, if at all. I've researched the diseases and the vaccines for them and will be doing only a select few, if any.

I think delaying until YOU feel right about it is the best answer. I don't think there is any magic age.

illinoismommy,

to what Beth and the others that will reply after me. Well, I'm not even married or pregnant or a mother yet, but in the future, I will be. Really, haven't did any research on vaccinations yet, but feel that coming here, and etc has me not wanting to do vaccination/s or at least delayed them at first.

[shmoo]

Originally Posted by jessicaabruno

illinoismommy,

to what Beth and the others that will reply after me. Well, I'm not even married or pregnant or a mother yet, but in the future, I will be. Really, haven't did any research on vaccinations yet, but feel that coming here, and etc has me not wanting to do vaccination/s or at least delayed them at first.

Interesting, then, that you already have a "say no tvax" blinky.



OP -- yes, there are advantages to waiting. If my son wasn't in DC we would have considered slowing down and delaying his vax schedule. Some things to consider: where you live, plans to travel, local population changes, how much interaction your child will have with others, your child's health (including alergies).

I also considered the responsibility I felt I owed to my community. My son is healthy and had no indications at all that he would have trouble with vaccines. Lots of folks here at MDC do not "believe" in herd immunity. But to me that is like not believing in gravity. :-) There are children who cannot be immunized and adults likewise that are at risk -- if sufficient healthy participants are opted out -- those folks are at risk. They need the herd to protect them. If the herd isn't mostly immunized then . . .

So I look at immunizations as I do voting. My vote my not always be the most critical, but if enough folks opt out . . .

For me, that community responsibility would have tipped the balnce even if we were not using daycare. At the end of the day, only you can determine your cost/benefit analysis. Good luck!

[sophiekat]

nak
well, putting aside "herd immunity" and "civic responsibility" (both of which have been addressed more than once in the main forum, for my (doctor) dh and i the decision to delay/select/opt out of vaxes came down to this: we had no way of knowing the day dd was born (when they want to do the hep b vax) if she was allergic to anything or would have any contraindications. we still didn't know at 2, 4, 6, 9 months. she was ebf, so we felt confident that 1. my antibodies were passed on to her via breastmilk and 2. were she to come down with any of the diseases she would have been vaxxed against she would have recovered well. at 12 months we still weren'tconfident that any potential contraindications would have shown themselves, sowe are continuing to wait.
we *may* do some vax after she turns 2, though most likely we won't. neither of us are comfortable with the sheer volume of shots the cdc deems "necessary", especially when they start so early in life and have not been thoroughly tested for safety and/or efficacy. as a former lawyer myself ( to shmoo) i've seen some (pharmaceutical) drug injury cases that made me want to think twice about ever trusting anything put out by that industry. dh has also seen it in his research and practice, and is now ok with going against his med school indoctrination and waiting.
hth.

[mamakay]

Originally Posted by shmoo

Lots of folks here at MDC do not "believe" in herd immunity. But to me that is like not believing in gravity. :-) There are children who cannot be immunized and adults likewise that are at risk -- if sufficient healthy participants are opted out -- those folks are at risk. They need the herd to protect them. If the herd isn't mostly immunized then . . .

I just want to comment on the herd immunity thing.
I do believe there is "herd immunity" to some diseases via vaccination, but there are just as many, if not more, for which no amount of vax coverage will create this effect.
Like tetanus (which isn't communicable) pertussis (for which the vax sucks on all levels, and doesn't prevent asymptomatic carriage) all three "meningitis vaxes" (which adults aren't vaxed for and carry asymptomatically all the time) IPV (which protects from viral meningitis from polio, but not "polio the stomach bug" it is most of the time).
And then there are some diseases that do have a herd effect, but it's also a negative one, like with chickenpox circulation decreasing and causing older people to get shingles.
And Mumps, which vaccination has caused to epidemiologically shift into an older age group.

So it's not that a lot of us completely dismiss "herd immunity". We just don't think it's so simple as "Be a good neighbor and get your child vaccinated with all the shots recommended for the good of the community."

[gentlebirthmothr]

Originally Posted by sophiekat

nak
well, putting aside "herd immunity" and "civic responsibility" (both of which have been addressed more than once in the main forum, for my (doctor) dh and i the decision to delay/select/opt out of vaxes came down to this: we had no way of knowing the day dd was born (when they want to do the hep b vax) if she was allergic to anything or would have any contraindications. we still didn't know at 2, 4, 6, 9 months. she was ebf, so we felt confident that 1. my antibodies were passed on to her via breastmilk and 2. were she to come down with any of the diseases she would have been vaxxed against she would have recovered well. at 12 months we still weren'tconfident that any potential contraindications would have shown themselves, sowe are continuing to wait.
we *may* do some vax after she turns 2, though most likely we won't. neither of us are comfortable with the sheer volume of shots the cdc deems "necessary", especially when they start so early in life and have not been thoroughly tested for safety and/or efficacy. as a former lawyer myself ( to shmoo) i've seen some (pharmaceutical) drug injury cases that made me want to think twice about ever trusting anything put out by that industry. dh has also seen it in his research and practice, and is now ok with going against his med school indoctrination and waiting.
hth.

Originally Posted by mamakay

I just want to comment on the herd immunity thing.
I do believe there is "herd immunity" to some diseases via vaccination, but there are just as many, if not more, for which no amount of vax coverage will create this effect.
Like tetanus (which isn't communicable) pertussis (for which the vax sucks on all levels, and doesn't prevent asymptomatic carriage) all three "meningitis vaxes" (which adults aren't vaxed for and carry asymptomatically all the time) IPV (which protects from viral meningitis from polio, but not "polio the stomach bug" it is most of the time).
And then there are some diseases that do have a herd effect, but it's also a negative one, like with chickenpox circulation decreasing and causing older people to get shingles.
And Mumps, which vaccination has caused to epidemiologically shift into an older age group.

So it's not that a lot of us completely dismiss "herd immunity". We just don't think it's so simple as "Be a good neighbor and get your child vaccinated with all the shots recommended for the good of the community."

sophiekat and mamakay,

[alegna]

Originally Posted by illinoismommy

For those of you who believe both that some vaccinations work, and that they may be the cause of a lot of health issues.... how do you decide what to do?

I do think that to some extent most vaccines work. That said, I think we're toying with things we don't fully understand. There is research, for example, that shows that measles cures eczema. I sure know a lot of kids with eczema... I think that childhood disease is not awful. I have researched the diseases that are currently vaccinated for. I am comfortable with treating any of them that my child has a reasonable chance of contracting.

-Angela

[gentlebirthmothr]

Originally Posted by alegna

I do think that to some extent most vaccines work. That said, I think we're toying with things we don't fully understand. There is research, for example, that shows that measles cures eczema. I sure know a lot of kids with eczema... I think that childhood disease is not awful. I have researched the diseases that are currently vaccinated for. I am comfortable with treating any of them that my child has a reasonable chance of contracting.

-Angela

Angela,

[3girlmom]

Here's my experience with delayed vaccinating: I vaccinated my first child right on schedule, because didn't really know any better and the pediatrician pushed it, and she's now 5 and perfectly normal/healthy. But my second child had terrible responses to the shots, it would take her weeks to recover. After her 4th month check-up I found a new doctor who advocates delay. She got one shot when she was 13 months old, and had another terrible response - so sick she wound up in the hospital for dehydration. She just turned two and I got her immunized for meningitis and for pneumonia (two separate shots a month apart), because we live in a large university town (currently experiencing a mumps outbreak, even) with a large medical center and given our circumstances (I teach undergraduates, the world's germiest population) I felt like it was important...anyway, she's had a great response to her two shots. She had one today and after the trauma of the needle, has been fine ever since. No fever, no soreness, not even a longer-than-usual-nap. I'm very pleased at how delayed vaccinating has worked for us and don't intend to give my third child any shots before age 2.

[aisraeltax]

Originally Posted by shmoo

Lots of folks here at MDC do not "believe" in herd immunity. But to me that is like not believing in gravity. :-)

For me, that community responsibility would have tipped the balnce even if we were not using daycare. At the end of the day, only you can determine your cost/benefit analysis. Good luck!

you may believe in herd immunity, but its not a proven theory (or at least i haven't seen research proving it) and the statement that not accepting an unproven theory is equivalent to not believing in general relativity is really unfair.

i consider my responsibility to my children above responsibility to all others. i think that is my job as a parent. having said that, however, i do take my obligations to my community seriously...i just dont think they require me to inject toxins in my children if i deem it unnecessary.

the 2 year rule for us basically has been based on the blood/brain barrier mentioned below and also the idea that it gives me sufficient time to research these issues.

actually, we just came up with another agreement yesterday. beginning in November 2006, we are going to take each disease and spend 2 months researching and discussing the disease and the vax counterpart...the risks of the disease and the risks/benefits of the vaccination. we are starting with Whooping Cough. We have 8 that we are going to discuss, so we are going to be doing this for the next 16 months, at which time E will be 26 months. so i just bought myself another 2 months.



good luck! there is a lot to learn. read here and on the main vax board. also, there is a sticky over there with a list of recommended books. those, IMHO, are absolutely necessary for any parent willing to look this incredibly difficult issue square in the face.

and welcome to the vax board!

rach

[momofcutie]

Sorry! Wrong thread!

[AmieV]

I personally feel like the main advantage is to establish your own confidence and feel ok about whatever you're doing, regardless of what it is. I know there are reasons for certain ages being better than others, but from what I've read on the main vax board, unfortunately, no age is ultimately "safe". It's really up to you and what you are comfortable with intellectually and emotionally, and only you can make those decisions for your kid.