or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Archives › Miscellaneous › Vaccinations Archives › Everything Else › What can you tell me about the rotavirus vaccine?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What can you tell me about the rotavirus vaccine? - Page 5

post #81 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by delphiniumpansy View Post
As for age of vaccines, for those of you who would never consider a new vaccine, how many years would you want to pass before you would consider it? Age alone I mean? Deferring all other factors, what age would a vaccine have to be for you to consider it for your children? Would it matter if your children were immune compromised and had problems with things like bowel obstructions and thus it would be life threatening for them to get rotavirus? Or if they had a respiratory ailment, would you get a new pneumonia vaccine? How many years would you want to wait before getting it?
In general I would want a vax in use for 5-10 years to consider it. I would consider it if there were *extraordinary* circumstances.

-Angela
post #82 of 112
Okay. I'm seeing where the disconnect is now...

There is a difference between wild rota and vaccine strain rota....

these children (we know of 2) had VACCINE STRAIN rotavirus in their stool, but the researchers couldn't figure out how it got there.

That's what they were discussing in the link. That they tested the strain and positively identified it as vaccine strain. So no, it's not significant that they got rota...it's that the researchers found proof-positive that they were literally pooping out the vaccine (by finding vaccine strain rota in their stool).

I'll let someone else answer the rest as I don't plan on vaxxing at all, regardless of how new/old. (And my middle child is apparently considered to be an immunocompromised child as a result of steriod asthma treatments.)
post #83 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by delphiniumpansy View Post
As for age of vaccines, for those of you who would never consider a new vaccine, how many years would you want to pass before you would consider it? Age alone I mean? Deferring all other factors, what age would a vaccine have to be for you to consider it for your children? Would it matter if your children were immune compromised and had problems with things like bowel obstructions and thus it would be life threatening for them to get rotavirus? Or if they had a respiratory ailment, would you get a new pneumonia vaccine? How many years would you want to wait before getting it?

Just asking a few questions.
we won't be vaxing because the long term data would not be there. so unless someone invents a time machine, i don't have the information necessary to make a decision to vaccinate. i'm a big-picture, long-range plan kinda person. and trading acute disease in the short term for possible chronic disease in the long term (as well as possible acute disease too...at least we know that the immunity from vaccines is not permanent) just does not strike me as an intelligent, healthy thing to do.

and being intelligent and healthy are up there in my book.

as for having medical issues, that would be even more reason to not vaccinate. vaccines are tested with the healthiest of the healthy, and a child with medical issues would be even MORE of a guinea pig. no way would that happen to a child of mine. i'm not a gambling woman.
post #84 of 112
Quote:
Okay. I'm seeing where the disconnect is now...

There is a difference between wild rota and vaccine strain rota....

these children (we know of 2) had VACCINE STRAIN rotavirus in their stool, but the researchers couldn't figure out how it got there.

That's what they were discussing in the link. That they tested the strain and positively identified it as vaccine strain. So no, it's not significant that they got rota...it's that the researchers found proof-positive that they were literally pooping out the vaccine (by finding vaccine strain rota in their stool).
Oooooohh...

Is that what you were confused about, Pansy?

I was sort scratching my head over here wondering what the heck you thought statistical significance had to do with it...
post #85 of 112
Everytime a new vaccine is licensed, you go back to square one, because now you have absolutely no studies done on giving a child this new vaccine along with all the others. Not one long term study.

How long would I wait? Until the drug companies or FDA or some other acronym agrees to fund studies on adverse reactions.

When I read that there is inadequate understanding of biologic mechanisms underlying adverse events, I will wait until there is an adequate understanding. At that point, I will reconsider my current decisions, again, using the current information available at that point in time. Because like everyone else, we can only base our decisions on the information that is available at that point in time.
post #86 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamakay View Post
Oooooohh...

Is that what you were confused about, Pansy?

I was sort scratching my head over here wondering what the heck you thought statistical significance had to do with it...
I still do not see the problem. So what? Are you all imagining that there are serious lab issues, that safety protocols were compromised, that the scientists screwed up? Are you all thinking this is proof positive that scientist don't know squat and that these studies are useless? They still could have gotten it from each other. They could be in playgroups with each other for all we know. We do not know who these two children are. And, even if it does mean that there was a teeny breech in protocol in the lab, it is only two children. I do not think it refutes the whole study or invalidates it. It does not mean that the vaccine got into the placebo. Since we do not know for sure how it happened, conjecture is doing no one any good here.

I still think you are making a mountain out of a molehill.

But, for the sake of argument, someone please explain to me why I, as an S&Der who has vaxed my youngest with rotateq, should think that this piece of evidence is damning enough to stop. Why does it matter that 2 children out of 72000 pooped out vaccine strain rota during the trial for rotateq enough that I should no longer vax with it. What I am asking is why is that piece of evidence alone enough to discredit the vax. Nothing else, just that piece of evidence.
post #87 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by delphiniumpansy View Post
I still do not see the problem. So what? Are you all imagining that there are serious lab issues, that safety protocols were compromised, that the scientists screwed up? Are you all thinking this is proof positive that scientist don't know squat and that these studies are useless? They still could have gotten it from each other. They could be in playgroups with each other for all we know. We do not know who these two children are. And, even if it does mean that there was a teeny breech in protocol in the lab, it is only two children. I do not think it refutes the whole study or invalidates it. It does not mean that the vaccine got into the placebo. Since we do not know for sure how it happened, conjecture is doing no one any good here.

I still think you are making a mountain out of a molehill.

But, for the sake of argument, someone please explain to me why I, as an S&Der who has vaxed my youngest with rotateq, should think that this piece of evidence is damning enough to stop. Why does it matter that 2 children out of 72000 pooped out vaccine strain rota during the trial for rotateq enough that I should no longer vax with it. What I am asking is why is that piece of evidence alone enough to discredit the vax. Nothing else, just that piece of evidence.
why does it have to be so black and white and based on one issue alone?

imho, if there is a possibility of a breach of study protocol (whether it's human error or something else), i would take that into consideration as to how much i would trust the results of that study. i would want to know that the study investigators were looking into the anomalous event to determine how it may have happened. even if it's statistically insignificant, the fact that something SO unusual happened does render it significant.

scientists are human. sometimes they do good. sometimes they screw up collosally. just like all of us. even smart people make mistakes. i know i do!
post #88 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by delphiniumpansy View Post
Please post these statistics


My baby refused pedialyte both times she had it. Refused. Would not take it in any form, no matter what I did. We were freaked she was getting dehydrated and we were checking her for it all the time. We almost took her to the hospital for rehydration. It was scary.




I am glad you did not worry.

Most humans have, throughout time, always worried about babies with diarrhea and vomitting, whether they knew which of many illnesses was causing it or not.
Breastmilk is better than pedialyte.
Rotovirus went through my daycare (caught from a newly vaxed kiddo's sibling). My own kids had it, I had it. It was miserable, but staying hydrated was the key. All 10 of use got through just fine with no hospitalizations.
post #89 of 112
Quote:
What I am asking is why is that piece of evidence alone enough to discredit the vax. Nothing else, just that piece of evidence.
I think the biggest question it raises is whether there were some mix-ups in labelling between the placebo and the vaccine because then we don't know whether the rate of intussusception is actually comparable between vaccinated and unvaccinated children.
post #90 of 112
I'm not too worried about this "mix up" (or possible just that a babe shed it and they got it from them or whatever it was that happened). There are other studies on the vaccine such as here:

http://iah.iec.pa.gov.br/iah/fulltex...n9p807-816.pdf

But I'm still firmly in the "waiting" camp. I think the issue for me is that there are more studies happening and we know about them and we can expect them soon...so....

With everything else we have decided to get, there is quite a bit out there and no connections to past problems like this vaccine has. WHich is, possibly, an emotional decision and not really a 100% scientific one, but I don't think I could possible even go back to considering this one until this new info comes out.
post #91 of 112
Because even my 4th grader knows (when doing his science fair project) that if he mixes up a control group with a test group (no matter how big or small) the experiment/study is null/void and he must start over in order to ensure correct, scientific results.

This doesn't mean don't vax with this vaccine, that's a personal decision.

But IMO, don't quote information from a study that has been compromised in a manner that could directly result the findings. (Especially since the mixup does leave questions such as "Were there any other children? How are we sure there were only 2? Were these 2 children part of the group that developed intussusception?")

Tanya- Yes, that is my concern. Not that the researchers did anything purposefully or maliciously...nothing like that.
post #92 of 112
btw, what the heck does a 'teeny' breach in protocol mean? i didn't think you can quantify something like that. it either is, or it isn't. a breach in protocol is a breach in protocol, whether it's 'teeny' or 'ginormous' or any other pat, cutesy phrase you want to call it.
post #93 of 112
I don't think there was a breech at all. I don't think the study was compromied. I think 2 placebo group kids got rota from two control group kids and I see that as no big deal at all.
post #94 of 112
maybe it's a mountain out of a molehill, but they spend quite a bit of time talking about this anomaly in the above referenced hearing. are you telling us that YOU have a better judgement of this than the scientists do?

Quote:
Originally Posted by delphiniumpansy View Post
I don't think there was a breech at all. I don't think the study was compromied. I think 2 placebo group kids got rota from two control group kids and I see that as no big deal at all.
if it were so simple, they would have made that connection.
post #95 of 112
Quote:
I don't think the study was compromied.
To me the problem is that I don't know if it was compromised, and I don't think they know either.
post #96 of 112
I'm wondering what the outcome for "human health" is if a bovine/human reassoratant rotavirus "takes off" in the human population?

The primary selective pressure would obviously be transmission. Replication in the gut (causing traditional rotavirus disease) would come next....but what kind of cell tropism might pop up with a bovine rotavirus in humans?

It was only a couple of years ago that "they" figured out that rotavirus infection involves viremia (the virus replicates in the blood and 'infects' the whole body, not just the gut).

So what happens with this bovine/human rotavirus mutant when it's "serial passaged"
through multiple babies/kids?
post #97 of 112
You are a fussbudget Mamakay. Don't you realize that these science guys are on top of all this? I'm sure they know exactly what they are doing and what the long-term consequences will be. They have such a great track record to date, after all!
post #98 of 112
So who knows anything about competing brands in the works?
post #99 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by delphiniumpansy View Post
I think 2 placebo group kids got rota from two control group kids and I see that as no big deal at all.
I see this as a big deal because it pisses me off to NO END that my kids got rotovirus from a vaccinated child. Do I care that we got roto? Nah, not really. Illness is illness and it's the season. We take our Vit C, wash our hands often and drink plenty of fluids. But, when a parent KNOWINGLY exposes a freshly vaxed child and his contaminated stool to my family because a group of scientists decide that's acceptable it pisses me off. Why spread it on purpose to healthy kids????

I don't even take my kids to other people's houses when they have a cough or suspicious sniffle!

Did rotovirus suck? Yes. Was it gross? Yes.....oh, my gosh, what it EVER THE MOST DISGUSTING THING I've ever been through. Even though we went through that, I still wouldn't get the vax. The ingredients alone are enough to seal the deal. I'll take my chances with uncompromised immune systems and (semi)natural strains of diseases that go through the channels our bodies were meant to take them into. My 4 month old, exclusively breastfed baby was the only one that didn't get it. Even my husband and I got it and with me taking care of her all night and nursing, she still didn't get it.

It was at that moment I wish I had put my whole family on an exclusively breastmilk diet.

I don't want to start an additional debate about exposing freshly (live)vaxed kids to the population. I probably won't be back to read on here for another few weeks anyway and wouldn't be able to rebute.
post #100 of 112
My 12 mos old exclusively breastfed baby got rota and it was hell. Pure hell.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Everything Else
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Archives › Miscellaneous › Vaccinations Archives › Everything Else › What can you tell me about the rotavirus vaccine?