This is what confuses me so much about parents who choose to vax. If they believe that vaccines prevent their child from getting all these diseases, why should an unvaxed child be of any concern to them one way or another?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only way an infected unvaxed person should be able to infect a vaxed person would be if the vaccine doesn't work. In which case, why are they bothering to inject all this stuff into their kids, just on the off chance that it might prevent the disease? :
I really don't understand this line of thinking.
Not only this but most vaxes don't prevent transmission so they are no more likely to get more diseases from my kid as a vaxed kid.
The ones that do prevent transmission (MMR, Rotovirus, Chickenpox) I really don't care if dd gets them (and actually want her to get everything except rotovirus).
It's because the statistics are confusing you - it has nothing to do with the absolute numbers who get the disease and everything to do with the relative proportions of vaccinated and unvaccinated persons.
If 90% of children are vaccinated, 90% of the cases would have to be in vaccinated children to be able to say "unvaxed kids are really NO more likely to come down with said disease than one who is vaccinated".
Im not confused
If the people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny." Thomas Jefferson.
It makes absolutely no sense. It's just their way of enforcing compulsory vaccinations (which is honestly the only reason we do it). It's sad that the mainstream seems not to see that, and buys into the idea that un-vaxed kids are somehow dangerous...like a dog without a rabies shot!
Because the virus in the smallpox vaccine is live, it can be transmitted
to other parts of the body or to other people and so the site must be
cared for carefully.
More sites on live vaccine contamination:
5 vaccines (measles, mumps, rubella, polio, and varicella) are
LIVE virus vaccines. Live virus vaccines can sometimes infect the
recipient and can even sometimes infect those in close contact
with the recipient. These vaccines are given to young children, and
vaccine immunity sometimes wears off for adults. This can put a
pregnant mother or immunocompromised adult at risk by being
around a recently vaccinated child with live virus vaccines.
The nasal mist vaccine (Flumist®) contains a live virus.
Avoid contact with people who are sick or at increased risk of
getting the infection after you receive this vaccine. Talk to your
doctor about this if you have concerns
What they found: Fifty-nine cases of vaccine-associated
polio were confirmed in the United States between 1990 and
2003, the last occurring in 1999. Some children had gotten both
the inactive and the live virus, but no one who had the inactive
vaccine shot before the live vaccine came down with polio. Since
the inactive vaccine shot became the norm in 2000, no cases of
vaccine-associated polio have been reported in the United States.
[my notes on the polio] While I'm glad they are not doing the live
vaccine for polio anymore, this is a testimony to what happens
when you do have the live vaccine, and there are currently 5
of them that are still being done to this day]
See, this is exactly what I mean. Pertussis ISN'T a live virus vaccine.
And it's also why I didn't make a blanket statement that ALL live virus vaccines shed ONLY in the stool.
Mom to Jackson, b. January 2006
and Cassandra, b. October 2011
If their kids are vaxed it shouldn't matter to them, if unvaxed kids attend public school or not.
Harlan (11/4/2011)http://www.desertreadingloft.com--Independent Usborne Books Consultant