So my best friend has to pick ONE vaccine for her ds... - Page 3

[Emmeline II]

Originally Posted by xmasbaby7

Thanks for all of this.

This DH's idea of research is to ask their pediatrician who referred him to the Offit website. :

Offit is a vaccine patent holder; no conflict of interest there .

Answering that list of questions would buy some time as well.

[forestrymom]

Originally Posted by Emmeline II

The problem is that he is ONLY feeling, not thinking. A parent who cannot be bothered to research has no right to dictate to the parent who has.

Well, the AAP recommends vax'ing. How much more research is he expected to do? When the US's pediatricians are recommending it, its pretty tough to argue it. And he can just as easily come up with evidence that suggests that vaccines are useful.

What we have done is to sit down, as Ruthla suggested, and go through all the vaccines and the diseases for which they were designed to prevent. Its really pretty comforting to know that none of them are as scary as "they" make them seem.

As for not giving in to dh's, well, they ARE his kids too. He ought to have some say. It really is a matter of convincing him, and finding a way for him to believe HE is the one that thought it up. A little sneaky manipulation might go a long way. :

[beanbean]

How about a shot of Vit B?

[thefragile7393]

Originally Posted by forestrymom

Well, the AAP recommends vax'ing. How much more research is he expected to do? When the US's pediatricians are recommending it, its pretty tough to argue it. And he can just as easily come up with evidence that suggests that vaccines are useful.

As for not giving in to dh's, well, they ARE his kids too. He ought to have some say. It really is a matter of convincing him, and finding a way for him to believe HE is the one that thought it up. A little sneaky manipulation might go a long way. :

He needs to research BOTH sides is what he should be expected to do. There are two sides to every story and basing decisions on only one side is NOT research. Most people research cars extensively...the pros and cons of a particular model, compare it to other cars.....it's the same with vaxes. He needs to look at stuff like from insidevaccines.com or the Sears or Cave books and learn about the diseases, their treatments, how to prevent complications. THAT'S real research, not just beleiving what CDC and AAP spout. If he's not willing to do that, then my opinion is that he gets no say. My dh refuses to do any research at all...but thankfully gives me no flack for my decisions. He knows that unless he's willing to put the time and effort for research or read what I have found, he just dosn't have enough info to make an informed opinion.

[amnesiac]

I have removed some posts from this thread whicha are either UAVs or responding to/quoting such posts. I will be sending PMs within the next day or so. Please remember:

Do not post in a disrespectful, defamatory, adversarial, baiting, harassing, offensive, insultingly sarcastic or otherwise improper manner, toward a member or other individual, including casting of suspicion upon a person, invasion of privacy, humiliation, demeaning criticism, name-calling, personal attack, or in any way which violates the law.

Feel free to PM any questions.

[Astoria]

I think the question would feel more interesting if it were hypothetical. I enjoy hearing actual responses to the question, rather than all the concern and analysis about their marriage.

We're selective vaxer's so we have actually grappled with a version of this question. Not "one" vaccine, but which are important enough to us to take on the risks and which are not. Very few turn out to be important enough to us. But DTaP is one of them. That's what I would pick. Unfortunately I hate the tetanus portion which I think is reactive and unnecessary. I'm frustrated that they don't make this vaccine in single disease shots, as we really just choose to get it for the Pertussis vaccination.

Since they are real people and not hypothetical people, I second the Sears' book suggestion. It's a particularly useful book for persons like your friend's partner who are looking for solid information that feels free of agendas. It's also a great source because the potential benefits of vaccines are acknowledged, disarming pro-vaxers because they feel understood, and then the problems, side-effects, ingredients, etc... are arrayed which raises consciousness about the real risks and issues.

[theretohere]

Originally Posted by nwmamas

Assuming they've fought about this and that she's presented DH with evidence, stats, and all that jazz, which one does he want? If she's willing to yield for the sake of compromise, I say yield to DH's research and trust him to make this parenting choice himself.

:
As much as I'm anti-vax, I'm anti-not going with what my marriage needs.

[forestrymom]

Originally Posted by thefragile7393

He needs to research BOTH sides is what he should be expected to do. There are two sides to every story and basing decisions on only one side is NOT research. Most people research cars extensively...the pros and cons of a particular model, compare it to other cars.....it's the same with vaxes. He needs to look at stuff like from insidevaccines.com or the Sears or Cave books and learn about the diseases, their treatments, how to prevent complications. THAT'S real research, not just beleiving what CDC and AAP spout. If he's not willing to do that, then my opinion is that he gets no say. My dh refuses to do any research at all...but thankfully gives me no flack for my decisions. He knows that unless he's willing to put the time and effort for research or read what I have found, he just dosn't have enough info to make an informed opinion.

Well, we quote the AAP time and time again wrt breastfeeding. It just seems like, you can't expect it to work in your (no fingers pointed, btw) favor for some things and not others.

I can really empathize with this mother. Fortunately, my dh was receptive to the Cave book and we never went any further. But I've tried convincing my mother that the choice we made is right, and while I know I get to make the decision, she has pointed me time and time again to the recommendations by the CDC and the AAP--both of which I have cited to her about breastfeeding from time to time.

I hope they can come to a compromise.

[Plummeting]

Originally Posted by wednesday

I think the measles vaccine is probably the only one where a single dose actually has a reasonable amount of established efficacy. For a long time it was given as just a single dose, the booster was added later to try to make it last longer. Just about any other vaccine is supposed to be 3+ doses to establish much of any immunity. So -- if I were going to give JUST ONE vaccine, one time, I guess I'd go with measles. And FWIW I'd probably go for the whole MMR, I'm not really convinced by the arguments for splitting that one up.

The recommendations aren't an accurate representation of what's happening in reality, though. Two doses of IPV confer immunity to over 90% of recipients. Two doses of tetanus do as well. And as far as risks go, I think two doses of IPV (or even three) has a lower risk of side effects than one dose of measles vaccine. Measles vaccine has viral contaminants from animals (such as bovine diarrhea virus, IIRC). IPV does not and it also does not contain thimerosal or aluminum. It's a much safer vaccine, IMO. And if the idea is to give as few vaccines as possible, why on earth give THREE at one time? It makes no sense whatsoever, if the father is willing to agree to just one. Rubella is harmles to children and mumps is a milder disease than chickenpox. Why vaccinate for them just because you think vaccinating for all three is no more dangerous than doing measles alone? Logically, it doesn't even make sense that all three poses no more risk at all than one. Those are three attenuated viruses vs. one. How could they even have the same risk profile in reality?

[nataliachick7]

To all of you choosing Dtap...what the heck?? Dtap is an EXTREMELY reactive vaccine if not the MOST reactive. The pertussis componenet is IMO, extremely dangerous. My son looked like something out of the excorcist after both doses, after that, never again. Even a mainstream ped, which i dont see anymore, told me that my son was never to have another DtaP dose, ever.
I would go with choosing the LEAST reactive vaccine, like IPV.
The MMR is also quite frightening, as it is a live vaccine, and IMO, is linked to neurological/gut issues.

but i agree, it sounds like the husband just wants to have control...making her choose one vaccine? that isnt going to acquire any kind of immunity, most likely.It's selfish, sounds like he just wants to prove something.

[nataliachick7]

Originally Posted by Plummeting

The recommendations aren't an accurate representation of what's happening in reality, though. Two doses of IPV confer immunity to over 90% of recipients. Two doses of tetanus do as well. And as far as risks go, I think two doses of IPV (or even three) has a lower risk of side effects than one dose of measles vaccine. Measles vaccine has viral contaminants from animals (such as bovine diarrhea virus, IIRC). IPV does not and it also does not contain thimerosal or aluminum. It's a much safer vaccine, IMO. And if the idea is to give as few vaccines as possible, why on earth give THREE at one time? It makes no sense whatsoever, if the father is willing to agree to just one. Rubella is harmles to children and mumps is a milder disease than chickenpox. Why vaccinate for them just because you think vaccinating for all three is no more dangerous than doing measles alone? Logically, it doesn't even make sense that all three poses no more risk at all than one. Those are three attenuated viruses vs. one. How could they even have the same risk profile in reality?

:

[snuffles]

Well, it depends on whether you mean the vax that has the least likelihood of causing a reaction--in my mind, I would lean towards the polio vax. But, if it's one VPD that we're betting on being the most likely to catch, I would say DPT (yes I know it's more likely to cause a reaction) because pertussis is pretty prevalent, and can be pretty scary. That includes tetanus as well, which, although I know is rare, is one that always sticks out in my mind and causes me the most worry.

[Emmeline II]

Originally Posted by forestrymom

Well, the AAP recommends vax'ing. How much more research is he expected to do? When the US's pediatricians are recommending it, its pretty tough to argue it. And he can just as easily come up with evidence that suggests that vaccines are useful.

How much more research? Actual research. Going with the AAP recommendation wholesale is not research. There are US pediatricians recommending against vaccination as well; they may be in the minority, but they are there. He may "just as easily" find other information, but he cannot be bothered; that's the problem. If he did come up with information the two of them could evaluate it together. I have a formerly pro-vax dh as many others here do. This problem is not unique to the OP'S friend or you. I had to make a similar research demand this in regards to night nursing and dental caries even though the AAPD states that toddlers with caries must cease night nursing.

What we have done is to sit down, as Ruthla suggested, and go through all the vaccines and the diseases for which they were designed to prevent. Its really pretty comforting to know that none of them are as scary as "they" make them seem.

Yeah, I suggested that too, and provided questions, and provided links.

As for not giving in to dh's, well, they ARE his kids too. He ought to have some say. It really is a matter of convincing him, and finding a way for him to believe HE is the one that thought it up. A little sneaky manipulation might go a long way. :

As many have stated, the parent who refuses to research does not trump the parent who has. The "do something" parent needs to justify the "something" to the "do nothing" parent.