Less than 1% of children have no vaccines. Really? - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#1 of 31 Old 10-07-2010, 12:01 PM - Thread Starter
 
Xerxella's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 1,976
Mentioned: 114 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
So this came up in another post, but i find it fascinating. The CDC reports that less than 1% of children have no vaccines.

http://www.cdc.gov/media/pressrel/2010/r100916.htm

Really? I know I live in my own little world, but this seems WAY low. In my DH's family (not crunchy) about half the families are vaxing and half are not at all. At my conservative office, it's much less, but it's way more than 1%. It's about 5-10%, I would guess.

So, do most people think the CDC is right? (on this subject )

Married to one of the last good guys left Jim
Mom to AJ 4/07 and Genevieve 5/09

And then: I'm really, really tired of making angels.

But wait, could it really be true?


The whole story at: www.xerxella.blogspot.com
Xerxella is online now  
#2 of 31 Old 10-07-2010, 12:19 PM
 
~Charlie's~Angel~'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,505
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I just read the first paragraph to my friend (the one who got me thinking twice about vaxxes to begin with, and whose children are 12 and 14 and have not had one shot their entire lives) And HE said he thinks its right. . Im not saying hes god, but hes well read, and has always considred us in a very small minority group.
~Charlie's~Angel~ is offline  
#3 of 31 Old 10-07-2010, 12:50 PM
 
peainthepod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Chasing sanity
Posts: 2,342
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'm sure it depends on the region. Around here, vaccine-free is not uncommon. In fact I'd say we know maybe one family that fully vaxes, several that don't vax at all, and a few selective/delayed families. But the choice to keep your children vaccine-free is very much respected where I live now and doesn't raise eyebrows at all, as far as I can tell.

But when I lived in New York (NYC and then upstate) we only knew a couple of other vaccine-free families. Most people we met in NY vax to the gills there and don't give it a second thought (and no, I'm NOT saying most vaxers don't think about it--I'm saying the people we knew couldn't tell you what their children were getting or when, or even why, just that it was "time for their shots, so we go", "the doctor says he needs this, so we get it", etc.).

Loving wife partners.gif and mama to my sweet little son coolshine.gif (Fall 2008) and a beautiful baby girl babyf.gif(Fall 2010)

 

When a stupid man is doing something he is ashamed of, he always declares that it is his duty. --George Bernard Shaw

peainthepod is offline  
#4 of 31 Old 10-07-2010, 01:17 PM
 
Pirogi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 964
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I would believe that figure is accurate in my area. Or maybe a little high.
Pirogi is offline  
#5 of 31 Old 10-07-2010, 01:30 PM
 
Emmeline II's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 8,817
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Most non-vaxers I know started out as vaxers or selective vaxers, then moved on to not vaxing.

"It should be a rule in all prophylactic work that no harm should ever be unnecessarily inflicted on a healthy person (Sir Graham Wilson, The Hazards of Immunization, 1967)."
Emmeline II is offline  
#6 of 31 Old 10-07-2010, 01:36 PM
 
changingseasons's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Seattle
Posts: 8,802
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emmeline II View Post
Most non-vaxers I know started out as vaxers or selective vaxers, then moved on to not vaxing.
That's what we did with DD.

BUT- we also (since then) opted out of our state's vaccine registry/database/whatever, so they really don't have any clue if my child is still getting vaccinated or not. I think a lot of non-vaxers probably opt out of those systems (if they know about them), so I think the CDC's numbers are probably low because they don't have any way to track those children.

Mom to DD1 (10/07) and DD2 (3/11)
geek.gif I blog about our life with food allergies and eosinophilic disorders.
changingseasons is offline  
#7 of 31 Old 10-07-2010, 01:39 PM
 
Bokonon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2,975
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emmeline II View Post
Most non-vaxers I know started out as vaxers or selective vaxers, then moved on to not vaxing.


That's been my experience as well. My first was fully vaccinated on schedule until his last WCV when I agreed to the DTaP (which he had a reaction to!) but declined the MMR and Chicken Pox.

My daughter got all her 2-month shots and THEN I started doing my research. She has had one DTaP since then, but unless I see compelling evidence to get them any additional vaxes, those DTaPs will be their last for a very, very long time.

A, jammin.gif mama to a boy (2005) and a girl (2009)
Bokonon is offline  
#8 of 31 Old 10-07-2010, 02:17 PM
 
smeep's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 2,812
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
My question is are they saying less than 1% of children currently receive no vaccines (which would include both never-vaxed children as well as those whose parents stopped vaxing altogether at some point) or are they talking about only those who NEVER received vaccines? Because I could see the second being a much smaller pool. A lot of non-vaxers I know went that way because their LOs had a reaction, or started out as selective-delayed, or were unsure but were "pushed" into the first set or two before they did enough research to turn them all down. And there are LOADS of selective/delayed vaxers out there...even just getting one vaccine puts someone under selective/delayed.

- Emy . Single mom to DS nut.gif Ezra (15.12.05), angel2.gif Thames (reincarnated 18.04.08) and DD rainbow1284.gif babyf.gif Allora (11.02.11) and dog2.gif Hoppylactivist.gif  novaxnocirc.gif  waterbirth.jpg fambedsingle2.gif bfinfant.giffemalesling.GIFcd.gif

smeep is offline  
#9 of 31 Old 10-07-2010, 02:25 PM
 
Otto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Where the end of the world began
Posts: 645
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by changingseasons View Post
BUT- we also (since then) opted out of our state's vaccine registry/database/whatever, so they really don't have any clue if my child is still getting vaccinated or not. I think a lot of non-vaxers probably opt out of those systems (if they know about them), so I think the CDC's numbers are probably low because they don't have any way to track those children.
The NIS isn't based on state registries. It's a robo-dialed phone survey with follow-up among participants.
Otto is offline  
#10 of 31 Old 10-07-2010, 02:35 PM - Thread Starter
 
Xerxella's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 1,976
Mentioned: 114 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
From the CDC: "Immunization of children aged 19-35 months old against most vaccine-preventable diseases remains high in the United States, with coverage for most of the routine vaccines remaining at or over 90 percent, according to a report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Less than 1 percent of young children got no vaccinations, the CDC report said."

So, less than 1% got no vaccinations.

And, they say that coverage for routine vaccinations is at 90%. So, selective vaxers are at about 9%?

Anyways, I tend to think that since this is a robo-dialed survey, non-vaxers are just less likely to answer.

Married to one of the last good guys left Jim
Mom to AJ 4/07 and Genevieve 5/09

And then: I'm really, really tired of making angels.

But wait, could it really be true?


The whole story at: www.xerxella.blogspot.com
Xerxella is online now  
#11 of 31 Old 10-07-2010, 05:18 PM
 
Marnica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,585
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Otto View Post
The NIS isn't based on state registries. It's a robo-dialed phone survey with follow-up among participants.
That wouldn't seem to reflect accurate numbers at all. I know I don't participate in those surveys when Im called and I'd be willing to bet that many non-vaxers steer clear of theses types of "surveys"

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.

Marnica is offline  
#12 of 31 Old 10-07-2010, 05:41 PM
 
Otto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Where the end of the world began
Posts: 645
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marnica View Post
That wouldn't seem to reflect accurate numbers at all. I know I don't participate in those surveys when Im called and I'd be willing to bet that many non-vaxers steer clear of theses types of "surveys"
Yeah, but this is basically the anti-Nielsen argument that people make when their favorite shows get canceled. It's possible to do population sampling with well-defined error bounds. This doesn't mean that uncertainties or nonresponse bias don't exist, but that they need to be understood and modeled. It's inherent in any such large-scale sampling, which is by definition an indirect technique.

The NIS methodology and data analysis are thoroughly documented here (the first two under "Methodology" are probably of the broadest interest).
Otto is offline  
#13 of 31 Old 10-07-2010, 06:56 PM
 
Annie Mac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,150
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
That number doesn't seem impossible. I live in a pretty crunchy area, in a country which does not legislate vaxes, and all the babies I know have their shots.
Annie Mac is offline  
#14 of 31 Old 10-07-2010, 07:35 PM
 
heathergirl67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 461
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xerxella View Post
From the CDC: "Immunization of children aged 19-35 months old against most vaccine-preventable diseases remains high in the United States, with coverage for most of the routine vaccines remaining at or over 90 percent, according to a report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Less than 1 percent of young children got no vaccinations, the CDC report said."

So, less than 1% got no vaccinations.

And, they say that coverage for routine vaccinations is at 90%. So, selective vaxers are at about 9%?

Anyways, I tend to think that since this is a robo-dialed survey, non-vaxers are just less likely to answer.
I agree
http://www.mothering.com/discussions....php?t=1268622
heathergirl67 is offline  
#15 of 31 Old 10-07-2010, 07:46 PM
 
mamadelbosque's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Ohio, USA
Posts: 6,946
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I have zero probelms believeing that - and the further explanation of 9% selective, 1% none and 90% full sounds about right to me. My boys are both vax free, but I'm highly well aware they are in the vast vast vast minority!!!
mamadelbosque is offline  
#16 of 31 Old 10-07-2010, 07:51 PM
 
candycat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 174
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
So my non-vaxed, UC-d daughter should pretty much not exist, statistically speaking, right? Go figure.
candycat is offline  
#17 of 31 Old 10-07-2010, 08:25 PM
 
MamatoPeach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 376
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
then whats the big deal with the 'vaccinators' freaking out about the non vaccinators. shouldnt they feel comfortable with their high amount of vaccination rate? they should have peace of mind, maybe they have a feeling that they are doing the wrong thing so they are pushing the topic hard to hide the truth...

Mama to & +:::
MamatoPeach is offline  
#18 of 31 Old 10-08-2010, 01:47 AM
 
november's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location:
Posts: 815
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
In my little area of the world, it's pretty accurate, I'd say. I'm the only person that I know of "in real life" that doesn't vaccinate. I don't even think I know of anyone that selectively vaccinates!

SAHM to my sweet girl born in fall 2009

november is offline  
#19 of 31 Old 10-08-2010, 11:22 PM
 
caned & able's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Bridgeport, ME
Posts: 999
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
If less than one percent of the children have no vaccines, then there is still herd immunity, isn't there? So there is nothing to worry about, so what is the big deal?

The article is trying to marginalise people who do not vaccinate and say that they are a tiny minority.
caned & able is offline  
#20 of 31 Old 10-24-2010, 12:43 PM
 
inchwormz's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 841
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I believe those who choose not to vaccinate still ARE a tiny minority. I think that number would still be accurate if they had polled a larger percentage of the population. It's much easier to go with the flow, believe in your doctor, and be convinced that the way we've been doing things for decades is correct, than it is to stand up against the status quo and question things.

A recent Huggies study indicated that parents that choose cloth diapers are still a huge minority - only 4% in the USA and 8% in Canada. There is little disputing the facts of economic savings, environmental benefits, ease of use and health of baby when it comes to cloth diapers. It seems to me we have a much longer road with regards to vaccines, considering how "commonplace" cloth diapers seem to be for parents like us.

Tamara , WAHM to Rayne (03/05) and Aurora (05/08).
inchwormz is offline  
#21 of 31 Old 10-24-2010, 01:18 PM
 
inchwormz's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 841
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Sorry for the repost but I wanted to link to the cloth diaper study. I couldn't find the numbers I was looking for in the Huggies Every Little Bottom study that was on my mind (I thought they were here) but even if we used the RDA as a source, the stats are low - much lower than I would have thought for cloth diapering parents.

RDA suggests 7.5% as an average for babies in cloth diapers (92.5% in disposables). I think we have a long way to go with regards to vaccination, considering the number of cloth diapering parents is still so low.

http://www.realdiaperassociation.org/diaperfacts.php

Tamara , WAHM to Rayne (03/05) and Aurora (05/08).
inchwormz is offline  
#22 of 31 Old 10-27-2010, 12:25 PM
 
ilovemygirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 535
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
It sounds a little low to me but not unbelievable. I've searched out "crunchy" mamas high and low for over 3 years now since I had my LO and have found many that selectively vaxed but only two others that have never vaxed at all. I'm not sure if I'll be able to explain this the way I mean it but completely not vaxing is the hardest and most controversial "crunchy" thing there is. Generally speaking, mainstream people think you are weird if you cloth diaper or breastfeed after infancy and may be so bold as to make a snarky comment but I've never encountered the outright hostility at those things that being non-vax brings about. There are people that literally think I should be jailed for endangering the life of their child.
So yeah, I think it takes a strong and/or really well informed person to stand up to it all and say they won't vax at all and then on top of it admit it to others whether in person or by a survey.

mama to three little ladies
ilovemygirl is offline  
#23 of 31 Old 10-27-2010, 04:29 PM
 
just_lily's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,187
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The only people I know who have never had any vaccines is my daughter and my niece (yay for my brother and SIL!!) So I don't think 1% is way out of the realm of possibilities.

Wife to DH (06/10) and Mummy to DD (07/08).

just_lily is offline  
#24 of 31 Old 10-27-2010, 04:37 PM
 
caned & able's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Bridgeport, ME
Posts: 999
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
If only one percent of all children in the US are not vaccinated, why the scapegoating of unvaxed children in CA where ten children have died from pertussis this year and there have been 6,000+ confirmed cases?
caned & able is offline  
#25 of 31 Old 10-27-2010, 07:43 PM
 
ammiga's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,116
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by caned & able View Post
If only one percent of all children in the US are not vaccinated, why the scapegoating of unvaxed children in CA where ten children have died from pertussis this year and there have been 6,000+ confirmed cases?
There may be a higher portion of kids that haven't had the DTaP, but still had other vaxes.
ammiga is offline  
#26 of 31 Old 10-27-2010, 08:13 PM
 
caned & able's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Bridgeport, ME
Posts: 999
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
NO, nine of the deaths were in immigrant communities that are traditionally fully vaxed but the mothers do not typically breastfeed.

The healthcare professionals and county health workers are pushing for adult pertussis vaccines.

All but one of the deaths have also been in children who are LESS than two months of age.
caned & able is offline  
#27 of 31 Old 10-27-2010, 08:59 PM
 
Arduinna's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 32,562
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by MamatoPeach View Post
then whats the big deal with the 'vaccinators' freaking out about the non vaccinators. shouldnt they feel comfortable with their high amount of vaccination rate? they should have peace of mind, maybe they have a feeling that they are doing the wrong thing so they are pushing the topic hard to hide the truth...
Because we live in a world where people think that they can control everything, where someone must be to blame and because if we just legislate and force people to conform to what we want life will be risk free.
Arduinna is offline  
#28 of 31 Old 10-27-2010, 09:29 PM
 
EviesMom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Earth.
Posts: 3,601
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
It sounds about right to me number wise. I think there are a lot of selectively vaxed children, and I wonder what the CDC "fully vaxed" list would be, because what's required for school is different from state to state.

Happy with my DH, 2 kids, dog, fish, and frogs
EviesMom is offline  
#29 of 31 Old 10-28-2010, 08:38 PM
 
Shanesmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 202
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
That number seems a bit low to me. Having said that, I am the only parent that I know of not vaxing their kid.

Hehe

Crunchy Christian mama to my home birthed, unvaxed, uncirc boys Shane and Cody!!joy.gif
Shanesmom is offline  
#30 of 31 Old 10-28-2010, 10:45 PM
 
rabrog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Alaska
Posts: 8,319
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Those numbers seem right on to me. I'm sure there are pockets of non-vax'd kids around the US so to someone living in one of those areas, the number may seem low but overall, I think it's right on.

I also agree with the whole phone survey thing. I don't answer any questions regarding vaccines. If the survey sounds even remotely "health" oriented, I hang up. And as for the "anti-Nielsen" argument, I'll just say there's a difference between choosing not to be surveyed and never being asked to be surveyed. I've done Neilsen twice and I know the weekly ratings work differently and are not just random people with a booklet. I also know not to get too hooked on any show on NBC the first season it's on because there's a 90%+ chance it will be canned.

Jenn
rabrog is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off