ACIP Discusses Intussusception Risk From Rotavirus Vaccine, Limiting Tdap Administration - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#1 of 34 Old 08-29-2013, 06:47 AM - Thread Starter
 
emmy526's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,668
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)

http://www.aafp.org/news-now/health-of-the-public/20130624acipmeeting.html

 

 

Quote:
"The estimated range is 0.7 to 5.4 extra cases per 100,000 children who receive the rotavirus series," Loehr told AAFP News Now. "However, the vaccines have markedly decreased the number of hospitalizations and deaths from rotavirus.

So, in other words, yes, some babies are hurt by this vaccine but so what? We (supposedly)prevented hospitalizations using this drug.  

 

 

Quote:
ACIP member and family physician Doug Campos-Outcalt, M.D., M.P.A., of Phoenix, said physicians simply need to be alert for signs of intussusception.

Will that mean denial of adverse reactions?   as in, "oh the baby just has gas"

applejuice and BeckyBird like this.
emmy526 is online now  
#2 of 34 Old 08-29-2013, 06:57 AM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,530
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by emmy526 View Post

http://www.aafp.org/news-now/health-of-the-public/20130624acipmeeting.html


So, in other words, yes, some babies are hurt by this vaccine but so what? We (supposedly)prevented hospitalizations using this drug.  


Will that mean denial of adverse reactions?   as in, "oh the baby just has gas"

From the article

"The estimates suggest that the vaccine prevents around 100 deaths, 1,000 hospitalizations and 10,000 ER visits for every one excess death, hospitalization or ER visit it might cause" based on the heightened intussusception risk, said Loehr. "Given this risk-benefit ratio, the CDC still strongly recommends using the vaccine in the U.S."

"The data that have been presented indicate that there is a low, but real, increased risk of intussusception from rotavirus vaccines within the first six days after receiving it," Campos-Outcalt said. "That risk does not appear to be particularly high, and so that is why researchers are going to spend a lot of time and effort in the next few months trying to get a more exact estimation of that (risk)."

That doesn't sound like someone who is denial of an adverse reaction to me...

In fact it shows just the opposite. Doctors/scientists DO closely monitor vaccine reactions and report them when they find them, even if the risk is small.

In any case, the benefits clearly outweigh the risks unless you thinks its acceptable for 100 children to die from rota virus to prevent one from dying from a reaction to the vaccine?

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson 
teacozy is offline  
#3 of 34 Old 08-29-2013, 01:33 PM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,136
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 181 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post


From the article

"The estimates suggest that the vaccine prevents around 100 deaths, 1,000 hospitalizations and 10,000 ER visits for every one excess death, hospitalization or ER visit it might cause" based on the heightened intussusception risk, said Loehr. "Given this risk-benefit ratio, the CDC still strongly recommends using the vaccine in the U.S."
 

 

The main issue with this is that the risk of intussusception is probably equal with every vaccine (although it seems in general intussusception is more common in males - I wonder if that holds with vaccine induced intussuscption as well?)).

 

Rotavirus is not an equal opportunity disease.  Rotavirus is more likely to happen early in life (and when the risk of dehydration is more likely) when babies are in daycare and/or not breastfed.  

 

Anecdote alert:  I have 3 kids.  I assume they all have had rotavirus, as most kids did pre-vaccine era.    It was so mild I did not even notice it.  

  

Edited to add:  found this link, which points out the risk factors for Rotavirus hospitalisation:

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17133157


There is a battle of two wolves inside us.  One is good and the other is evil.  The wolf that wins is the one you feed.

 

Book and herb loving mama to 1 preteen and 2 teens (when did that happen?).  We travel, go to school, homeschool, live rurally, eat our veggies, spend too much time...

kathymuggle is online now  
#4 of 34 Old 08-30-2013, 01:58 AM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,789
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 120 Post(s)
And my healthy breast fed 10 month old ended up in hospital on IV fluids (also pre vaccine era). It was scary.

Mother of two living in UK. Daughter (2007) born in USA, son (2010) born here. I'm pro natural birth, midwife care, breastfeeding, co-sleeping, baby wearing and a keen advocate of cloth diapering. I'm a full time working research scientist (physical sciences) and I'm pro-vaccine.

prosciencemum is online now  
#5 of 34 Old 08-30-2013, 07:04 AM
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Outside the hive mind
Posts: 7,504
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 83 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

And my healthy breast fed 10 month old ended up in hospital on IV fluids (also pre vaccine era). It was scary.

And my healthy breast fed 9 month old didn't. She was sick for a couple of days. It wasn't scary. 

applejuice likes this.

Rainbow.giftstillheart.gifsmile.gif

 

"If you find from your own experience that something is a fact and it contradicts what some authority has written down, then you must abandon the authority and base your reasoning on your own findings"~ Leonardo da Vinci

Mirzam is online now  
#6 of 34 Old 08-30-2013, 07:08 AM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,208
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

And my healthy breast fed 10 month old ended up in hospital on IV fluids (also pre vaccine era). It was scary.

So you want to see someone else's baby die from the invasive procedure (vaccination) that might have protected your baby?
applejuice likes this.
Taximom5 is online now  
#7 of 34 Old 08-30-2013, 07:16 AM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,136
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 181 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post




"The estimates suggest that the vaccine prevents around 100 deaths, 1,000 hospitalizations and 10,000 ER visits for every one excess death, hospitalization or ER visit it might cause" based on the heightened intussusception risk, said Loehr. "Given this risk-benefit ratio, the CDC still strongly recommends using the vaccine in the U.S."
 

I would also like to point out that a hospital stay for rota probably includes IV fluids and not much else. 

 

A hospital stay for intussusception may very well involve surgery:

 

http://kidshealth.org/parent/system/surgical/intussusception.html#

applejuice likes this.

There is a battle of two wolves inside us.  One is good and the other is evil.  The wolf that wins is the one you feed.

 

Book and herb loving mama to 1 preteen and 2 teens (when did that happen?).  We travel, go to school, homeschool, live rurally, eat our veggies, spend too much time...

kathymuggle is online now  
#8 of 34 Old 08-30-2013, 07:31 AM
 
MamaMunchkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 356
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)

Baseline estimates of diarrhea-associated mortality among United States children before rotavirus vaccine introduction.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21691244

 

From the above - under Results:

... Black children died at almost 4 times the rate of white children. ...

 

Does anyone have any links/resources to explain this?


Pro rights (vaxes).
MamaMunchkin is offline  
#9 of 34 Old 08-30-2013, 11:01 AM
 
ParadigmShift's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 38
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Even a single case connected to such serious injury is not acceptable for me to in order to prevent a "possible" complication arising from rotavirus. There is that one child and the family whose life will never be the same again and it could be mine.
applejuice likes this.
ParadigmShift is offline  
#10 of 34 Old 08-30-2013, 11:51 AM
 
pers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 505
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ParadigmShift View Post

Even a single case connected to such serious injury is not acceptable for me to in order to prevent a "possible" complication arising from rotavirus. There is that one child and the family whose life will never be the same again and it could be mine.

 

So... we top vaccinating.  That one child who would have died is just fine, and their family is happy, never knowing what would have happened to them.  But how do the families of the 100 kid who now die of rota virus that could have been prevented by the vaccine feel?

 

It's a horrible thing to decide one vs. many even in the case where you have no idea who that one may be.  A perfectly safe vaccine would be the ideal solution and then we could save all the lives while harming no one, but unfortunately that just isn't possible at this time.  Does that mean it is just okay to stand by and let all those preventable deaths occur. 

 

Imagine two huge rooms each filled to the brim with an equal number of people.  In room A, 1 person will die.  In room B, 100 people will die. Which room would you feel safer standing in?  

pers is online now  
#11 of 34 Old 08-30-2013, 11:55 AM
 
ParadigmShift's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 38
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
With all due respect, if it was your child that was the "single" case of injury, would you still stand by your statements? If you do, then we do have different set of ethics and its not really debateable. This is all assuming efficacy of this particular vax is near perfect and herd immunity theory is totally valid and true of course.
applejuice and BeckyBird like this.
ParadigmShift is offline  
#12 of 34 Old 08-30-2013, 11:59 AM
 
ParadigmShift's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 38
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Just as an added note here..in my set of ethics, I do not rely on other peoples sacrifice to keep me or my family healthy.
applejuice and BeckyBird like this.
ParadigmShift is offline  
#13 of 34 Old 08-30-2013, 03:58 PM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,136
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 181 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by emmy526 View Post
 

http://www.aafp.org/news-now/health-of-the-public/20130624acipmeeting.html

 

"The estimated range is 0.7 to 5.4 extra cases per 100,000 children who receive the rotavirus series," Loehr told AAFP News Now. "However, the vaccines have markedly decreased the number of hospitalizations and deaths from rotavirus

 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post


From the article

"The estimates suggest that the vaccine prevents around 100 deaths, 1,000 hospitalizations and 10,000 ER visits for every one excess death, hospitalization or ER visit it might cause" based on the heightened intussusception risk, said Loehr. "Given this risk-benefit ratio, the CDC still strongly recommends using the vaccine in the U.S."
 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by pers View Post
 

 

 

 

Imagine two huge rooms each filled to the brim with an equal number of people.  In room A, 1 person will die.  In room B, 100 people will die. Which room would you feel safer standing in?

But is it really 1 versus a 100 for your child?

 

First off, the range emmy quote for intussusception is huge 07-5.4/100 000.  Are the figures teacozy quoted based on the 0.7, 5.4 or something in between?  If the quote is basing the risk of intussusception on 0.7, the risk may very well be a lot higher if 5.4/100 000 is closer to the truth.

 

Secondly, we know quite a bit about who is at risk for dehydration and hosptialisation from Rota.

-low birth rate/prematurity

-not breastfed

-in daycare at a young age

-African American

-younger mothers and those from a lower socio-economic background

 

Now, of course, people can have a severe case of Rota even if they do not belong to a high risk group.  It would be interesting to know what percentage of severe rota  are found in those with risk factors and those without.

applejuice likes this.

There is a battle of two wolves inside us.  One is good and the other is evil.  The wolf that wins is the one you feed.

 

Book and herb loving mama to 1 preteen and 2 teens (when did that happen?).  We travel, go to school, homeschool, live rurally, eat our veggies, spend too much time...

kathymuggle is online now  
#14 of 34 Old 08-30-2013, 06:09 PM
 
pers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 505
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ParadigmShift View Post

With all due respect, if it was your child that was the "single" case of injury, would you still stand by your statements? If you do, then we do have different set of ethics and its not really debateable. This is all assuming efficacy of this particular vax is near perfect and herd immunity theory is totally valid and true of course.

 

If you're child was one of the rare cases of death from rotavirus, would still stand by yours?

 

Of course I'd wish I could go back and do it differently if my child was the one, just as if I'd wished I hadn't gone for a drive to the mall with my kids if it resulted in us being in an accident where I lost one, etc, etc.  I'd still know though that even though it ended badly, I had made the best/safest choice for my kids with the information I had at the time.  

 

I know someone who was crossing an intersection when another driver ran the red light and t-boned him right on the driver's side door.  He was thrown into the passenger side and miraculously escaped with relatively minor injuries. From the amount of damage done around the driver's seat, he believes (and I think he's probably right) that he would have  been killed if his seatbelt had trapped him in it, but he wasn't, so he survived.  There are no guarantees in life, only relative risk, and I still wear my seatbelt and make my kids wear theirs even knowing doing so could kill us if we were even in a situation like he was (and you can bet I'd regret seatbelt use if it were to happen) because wearing a seatbelt is safer than not.   

 

Herd immunity is a bonus. My primary reason for vaccinating my kid is for their own protection though, not the protection of others.  I want them standing in the room where one person dies, not a hundred.   

 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post
 

But is it really 1 versus a 100 for your child?

 

First off, the range emmy quote for intussusception is huge 07-5.4/100 000.  Are the figures teacozy quoted based on the 0.7, 5.4 or something in between?  If the quote is basing the risk of intussusception on 0.7, the risk may very well be a lot higher if 5.4/100 000 is closer to the truth.

 

Secondly, we know quite a bit about who is at risk for dehydration and hosptialisation from Rota.

-low birth rate/prematurity

-not breastfed

-in daycare at a young age

-African American

-younger mothers and those from a lower socio-economic background

 

Now, of course, people can have a severe case of Rota even if they do not belong to a high risk group.  It would be interesting to know what percentage of severe rota  are found in those with risk factors and those without.

 

No, I don't.  Perhaps it is only  1 vs 50 or 1 vs 20 or even 1 vs 10.  I went with the average 1 vs 100 for simplicity since there is no way to know. It would be interesting to know that, and also to know if any of these factors make intussusception fro the vaccine more likely.  Death is is an extremely unlikely result for either rotavirus vaccination or infection in any case.  

pers is online now  
#15 of 34 Old 08-30-2013, 06:12 PM
 
ParadigmShift's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 38
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
For me the numbers are irrelevant. Since there are absolutely no screening for any vaxes it could be anyone who can get injured. Informed consent rarely occurs. Herd immunity is a wishful thinking at best with most adult population with non updated vax statuses. Why do some people have to be sacrificed under these conditions? This kind of reasoning is very disturbing to me for all the obvious reasons.
Mirzam, BeckyBird and Taximom5 like this.
ParadigmShift is offline  
#16 of 34 Old 08-30-2013, 06:44 PM
 
pers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 505
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ParadigmShift View Post

For me the numbers are irrelevant. Since there are absolutely no screening for any vaxes it could be anyone who can get injured. Informed consent rarely occurs. Herd immunity is a wishful thinking at best with most adult population with non updated vax statuses. Why do some people have to be sacrificed under these conditions? This kind of reasoning is very disturbing to me for all the obvious reasons.

 

While the screening might not be to the level you would like, it is not correct to say that there is absolutely no screening.  

 

In any case, is there screening prior to rotavirus infection?

 

And why is it okay to sacrifice 100 babies to death from rotavirus infection to save one from the vaccine?  

pers is online now  
#17 of 34 Old 08-30-2013, 07:09 PM - Thread Starter
 
emmy526's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,668
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)

http://www.familypracticenews.com/index.php?id=2934&type=98&tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=216018

 

Quote:
'But I'm vaccinated!': Why chemoprophylaxis is needed after pertussis exposure
applejuice likes this.
emmy526 is online now  
#18 of 34 Old 08-30-2013, 07:31 PM
 
ParadigmShift's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 38
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
There are lot of assumptions you make but lets say you are correct for the sake of the argument. Dont you think every parents has the right to know from their doc in form of, "One out of 100 babies will have an irreparable injury but 99 babies will be fine. You may or may not be that unlucky 1%. May I vax your child now?"
If that parent says okay then by all means. They KNOW what may or may not happen. It seems most docs do not make it a habit of this now do they?
It seems this is a warfront like scenario for you and that there will be casualties and it is unavoidable. Going with your train of logic...
All soldiers know they may die or be injured during a battle, but does that baby and his/her parents know?
applejuice likes this.
ParadigmShift is offline  
#19 of 34 Old 08-30-2013, 09:10 PM
 
Jennyanydots's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,380
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pers View Post


And why is it okay to sacrifice 100 babies to death from rotavirus infection to save one from the vaccine?  
I don't think this distant third person perspective is necessarily helpful, and I think it is the source of a big issue many of us take with the vaccine program in general. No, I don't think it's ok to sacrifice anyone, by mandating or withholding vaccines- but individual families should be allowed to decide which option is right for their children. Without pressure or enforcement, and with clear information and total transparency.
applejuice and BeckyBird like this.

chicken3.gif mama to two teens and two tots partners.gif madly in love with DP guitar.gif

Jennyanydots is offline  
#20 of 34 Old 08-30-2013, 10:15 PM
 
ParadigmShift's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 38
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I really think most people fail to recognize that this is a human rights issue. When INVOLUNTARY sacrifices are made from lack of informed consent, it is in violation of basic human rights. I will never try to block willing individuals from getting vaccinated  because that is their RIGHT and their CHOICE if they choose to do so under informed consent. I am demanding for the same right to refuse those very same shots.

By the way, guilt trips (especially ones with dubious nature) are usually not a good way to sway convictions. Only my mother has that pat down. :rotflmao

applejuice and BeckyBird like this.
ParadigmShift is offline  
#21 of 34 Old 08-30-2013, 10:33 PM
 
pers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 505
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ParadigmShift View Post

There are lot of assumptions you make but lets say you are correct for the sake of the argument. Dont you think every parents has the right to know from their doc in form of, "One out of 100 babies will have an irreparable injury but 99 babies will be fine. You may or may not be that unlucky 1%. May I vax your child now?"
If that parent says okay then by all means. They KNOW what may or may not happen. It seems most docs do not make it a habit of this now do they?
It seems this is a warfront like scenario for you and that there will be casualties and it is unavoidable. Going with your train of logic...
All soldiers know they may die or be injured during a battle, but does that baby and his/her parents know?

 

If there were a vaccine that were true for, then yes parents would be told, but a vaccine known to be that dangerous would never be approved outside of a pandemic situation where people are dropping like flies all around.

 

But yes, I think parents should be told that there are possible serious/deadly but extremely rare side effects, just as they should know for any medication.

 

I don't consider it a warzone scenario, just life, where "perfectly safe" is a lovely concept that sadly does not exist. I've been speaking about death here because it is the most extreme case, but really it is also extremely rare. For the vast majority of those who don't vaccinate for it, the worst consequence they are likely to suffer are a few days to a week of misery and stress and a big pile of laundry.   For the vast majority of those who do vaccinate, the worst they are likely to have happen is a baby who is fussy for and a few extra-bad diapers.  Realistically in our developed nation with easy access to medical care for treatment and IV fluids if needed, you're pretty safe either way you go.  

 

When considering the rare serious possible consequences of not vaccinating or vaccinating, vaccinating is obviously much safer when the information from that article is taken as correct.  I understand that any may think they are underestimating the risk or ignoring serious complications.  Whether the numbers are right or not and whether, when assuming they are, it is right or wrong to take the risk of vaccination  in hopes of avoiding/greatly reducing the disease and it's risks are related by separate discussions.  

pers is online now  
#22 of 34 Old 08-30-2013, 10:46 PM
 
ParadigmShift's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 38
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

If you're child was one of the rare cases of death from rotavirus, would still stand by yours? 

 

I did not see this til now, so I will answer it now. You did not quite answer but perhaps you are not comfortable with it.

From what I know today and of this very moment? Yes I would. Would my answer change in the future? Possibly.

 

Let me clarify some things here first:

I am not ANTI vax, just a person who believes that I get to decide what I choose to do with my own body. Whether it be, my diet, medical interventions..and yeah..that huge thing about taking care of my kid. Especially the welfare of my child. If I can get a 100 percent guarantee that my kid will never develop any infectious diseases with fantastic intact immune system, SIGN ME UP.

I am not ANTI science. My college degree is in biology. I thoroughly appreciated my undergrad studies and almost went into medical school. This does not make me a scientific expert, no. However I am FOR science. In fact, the theory of vaccine is quite ingenious. Like cures like..hell even homeopathy is found on such principles. In fact, the mechanism is actually opposite of most pharma drugs which acts allopathically.

 

Why am I standing by my statement? At the present moment, from what I have interpreted (possibly from similar documents/experiences/anecdotes you may have studied..I am assuming that you are very informed), I will take the chance of the "rarity" of rota death vs "rarity" of vaccine death. I am not going to list the reasons bc you can read my other posts and see my reasonings as to why my daughter is unvaxed as of now. As to why my answer might change in the future...science is ever evolving. Technology is ever changing. Only the ignorant would hold onto traditional tenets and reject new findings as they come for fear of change. Vaccines may get modified to a safer version. Perhaps we will get someone equivalent to  Kelsey (for thalidomide) in our lifetime which will show transparencies, enact screenings and investigate suspicious deaths/accidents  due to vaccines. I want to remain optimistic, thus I answer "possibly". For the alternative..is just too damn grim and it makes the book Hunger Games look like child's play.

 

 

Your seatbelt comment..I have posted elsewhere about that..but I will repeat it again here. Seatbelt is an inert object that does not react on a molecular level with a human body. Vaccine is a chemical object or rather chemical cocktail. Seatbelt works on a physics principle. Totally different ballgame.

applejuice and Magali like this.
ParadigmShift is offline  
#23 of 34 Old 08-30-2013, 11:00 PM
 
ParadigmShift's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 38
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pers View Post
 

 

If there were a vaccine that were true for, then yes parents would be told, but a vaccine known to be that dangerous would never be approved outside of a pandemic situation where people are dropping like flies all around.

 

But yes, I think parents should be told that there are possible serious/deadly but extremely rare side effects, just as they should know for any medication.

 

I don't consider it a warzone scenario, just life, where "perfectly safe" is a lovely concept that sadly does not exist. I've been speaking about death here because it is the most extreme case, but really it is also extremely rare. For the vast majority of those who don't vaccinate for it, the worst consequence they are likely to suffer are a few days to a week of misery and stress and a big pile of laundry.   For the vast majority of those who do vaccinate, the worst they are likely to have happen is a baby who is fussy for and a few extra-bad diapers.  Realistically in our developed nation with easy access to medical care for treatment and IV fluids if needed, you're pretty safe either way you go.  

 

When considering the rare serious possible consequences of not vaccinating or vaccinating, vaccinating is obviously much safer when the information from that article is taken as correct.  I understand that any may think they are underestimating the risk or ignoring serious complications.  Whether the numbers are right or not and whether, when assuming they are, it is right or wrong to take the risk of vaccination  in hopes of avoiding/greatly reducing the disease and it's risks are related by separate discussions.  

I took the liberties of bolding the statements that I respectfully disagree and agree with you.

It's the "rarity" thing that divides us. For you, it is acceptable. For me it's not. It's as simple as that. Science tells us there are injuries. For you, you are okay with the stats from the officials whether it's the CDC or WHO..or whatever. I am not okay with not even one. The whole purpose was to PREVENT death. But it may CAUSE death. Whether it's one or thousand matters not for me. There was a death from trying to PREVENT death. That is such an oxymoron, I don't even know where to start ranting about it.

I remember watching a commercial for some sort of depression medicine on TV long time ago and remember reading "death" as part of the side effect. Are you kidding me? So in order to lift off from depression, you have to risk death????  That's what vaccine feels like for me. Death/injury is what you need to risk in order to live? What?

The ethics of whether the information we receive is correct..yeah that's whole another can of worms. But yes, if you believe and trust in the information you are given, then it is correct to vax. You may trust your healthcare provider and I think that's great. For me, I only thank the heavens that I did not enter medical school. Different perspectives, different lives. I cannot live yours for you, and you cannot live mine. We can only make the best choices with the current knowledge we have in hand. 

applejuice likes this.
ParadigmShift is offline  
#24 of 34 Old 08-31-2013, 12:54 AM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,789
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 120 Post(s)
But the point is that in order to get our of bed, it leave the house, cross the road, eat anything - you have to risk death.

Life is "unavoidably unsafe" (the terms the US Supreme Court happened to chose to use about vaccines).

Mother of two living in UK. Daughter (2007) born in USA, son (2010) born here. I'm pro natural birth, midwife care, breastfeeding, co-sleeping, baby wearing and a keen advocate of cloth diapering. I'm a full time working research scientist (physical sciences) and I'm pro-vaccine.

prosciencemum is online now  
#25 of 34 Old 08-31-2013, 02:35 AM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,208
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

But the point is that in order to get our of bed, it leave the house, cross the road, eat anything - you have to risk death.

Life is "unavoidably unsafe" (the terms the US Supreme Court happened to chose to use about vaccines).

But getting out of bed and leaving the house are informed choices.

Being vaccinated with something that caused seizures, autoimmune disorders, and other problems was not an informed choice for my family. We were led to believe that there was no risk, and that there was no choice.

And that's how it is for the vast majority in the US.

Requiring an invasive procedure, even if it's for all the right reasons, like protecting a subgroup, is unethical if it endangers a different subgroup.

Requiring it when the safety/efficacy data comes from the industry who profits from it, with that industry having a proven track record of lies and cover ups, is unconscionable.

I'm sure if your child were injured from a vaccine, you would put your energy into calling for a better, safer vaccine program, rather than defending the one we've got.
applejuice and Magali like this.
Taximom5 is online now  
#26 of 34 Old 08-31-2013, 04:34 AM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,789
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 120 Post(s)
I'm sorry you felt you had no choice and were ill informed. I find it hard to believe its possible to think a medical procedure carries no risk, but if you say thats how you felt I am sorry for you.

I agree that improved education of the real (but very small risks) of all medical procedures - including vaccinating - is a good idea. All the experiences I have had have been very positive about being informed of the benefits and risks. But I'm well educated, and admit I'm likely speaking from a position of privilege - having also always had access to quality (and often govt provided) healthcare.

Mother of two living in UK. Daughter (2007) born in USA, son (2010) born here. I'm pro natural birth, midwife care, breastfeeding, co-sleeping, baby wearing and a keen advocate of cloth diapering. I'm a full time working research scientist (physical sciences) and I'm pro-vaccine.

prosciencemum is online now  
#27 of 34 Old 08-31-2013, 05:43 AM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,136
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 181 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

But the point is that in order to get our of bed, it leave the house, cross the road, eat anything - you have to risk death.

Life is "unavoidably unsafe" (the terms the US Supreme Court happened to chose to use about vaccines).

yeah - but I get something I find of value when leaving the house, crossing the road, etc.  Most activities are done because they relate to a need, some are done because they relate to a want.

 

Vaccination for diseases I am truly convinced (and stats back up) that I am incredibly unlikely to encounter does not make it into the need or want category for me.  

applejuice likes this.

There is a battle of two wolves inside us.  One is good and the other is evil.  The wolf that wins is the one you feed.

 

Book and herb loving mama to 1 preteen and 2 teens (when did that happen?).  We travel, go to school, homeschool, live rurally, eat our veggies, spend too much time...

kathymuggle is online now  
#28 of 34 Old 08-31-2013, 07:02 AM
 
serenbat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,370
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 101 Post(s)
I'm sorry you felt you had no choice and were ill informed. I find it hard to believe its possible to think a medical procedure carries no risk, but if you say thats how you felt I am sorry for you.


Not understanding medical risk and informed knowledge/consent - means you know little about the US Heath system. There are a large amount of medical related law suites here that have nothing to do with vaccines. Information for the general populations is very RARELY given out-you only find out several drs later!

 

 pro-transparency advocate

&

lurk.gif  PROUD member of the .3% club!

 

Want to join? Just ask me!

 

"You know, in my day we used to sit on our ass smoking Parliaments for nine months.

Today, you have one piece of Brie and everybody goes berserk."      ROTFLMAO.gif 

serenbat is offline  
#29 of 34 Old 08-31-2013, 08:33 AM
 
ParadigmShift's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 38
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
You have to have the RIGHT to choose which risks you take in life. I just do not understand why some of you do not understand this fundamental human right. I support and respect your right to get vaccines. Why can't I get the same respect back for refusal?
Will you live my life for me? My child's life? If something goes wrong, will you accept some liability? If the answer is no, then respect my right to refusal.
applejuice likes this.
ParadigmShift is offline  
#30 of 34 Old 08-31-2013, 10:27 AM
 
chickabiddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,492
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)

No one (here) is questioning your right to refuse the rotavirus vax.  Some of us are questioning the implication that the  vax is riskier than the disease.


Carseat-checking (CPST) and WAH mama to a twelve-year-old girl.
chickabiddy is online now  
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