Mothering Forums

Mothering Forums (http://www.mothering.com/forum/)
-   Vaccinations (http://www.mothering.com/forum/47-vaccinations/)
-   -   for the PRO-vacinators and those who "fully vaccinate" (http://www.mothering.com/forum/47-vaccinations/1432050-pro-vacinators-those-who-fully-vaccinate.html)

serenbat 07-12-2014 04:58 PM

for the PRO-vacinators and those who "fully vaccinate"
 
As it has been stated several times and the "science" does support it, vaccines are not 100%. Vaccine failure is real and waning occurs at various times.

With vaccine failure/waning in all the vaccines the question is - is your child 100% protected?

Do you even know, has your child had titers pulled to know if they are in that percentage of failure?

At what point are you testing or are you just assuming?

With all the known issues with Whopping Cough, CP also seems to be highly questionable, and other vaccines, just to name a few.
They are waning and at number that doesn't seem to match up with the next booster, so are you boostering up "early"?


We constantly hear that those that are pro-vaccine / full vaccinators talk about the importance they place on vaccinating, many mention for the protections of others, etc., so basically DO you know if the vaccines have taken in your child, are you testing, are you boosting early?


IF you are not can you explain why you are not since you really have no way of knowing if the vaccine "took" or not?

serenbat 07-12-2014 05:05 PM

AND - for those not vaccinating, and also for those who do!

Should there be titers done as a "routine" practice? Say you go to a well check at 12 months and they test for iron, should they also titer test or wait to say 18 months are 2 years? School Age?

beckybird 07-12-2014 07:22 PM

Great questions!

emmy526 07-13-2014 06:03 AM

Should children also be titered before starting school to prove they are in fact, immune to the diseases they were vaccinated for? And if not, parents then get boosters, then titered again to make sure the vaccine 'took'.

serenbat 07-13-2014 06:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by emmy526 (Post 17806050)
Should children also be titered before starting school to prove they are in fact, immune to the diseases they were vaccinated for? And if not, parents then get boosters, then titered again to make sure the vaccine 'took'.

IMO if you support vaccine sure, why wouldn't you want this and push for it.
I'm really surprised none of those who vaccinate are even talking about this.

Deborah 07-13-2014 06:50 AM

It isn't, IMO about controlling infectious illness, it is about controlling people.

The really big push to remove exemptions came after Merck's attempt to shove Gardasil mandates through state legislatures crashed and burned.

Here is what I think is the game:

1) tighten up exemptions
2) turn people who refuse vaccines into pariahs
3) set up systems where all new "approved by ACIP" vaccines are automatically added to school mandates in all states without legislative approval (some states already have this)
4) rake in the money

with a sideline dismissal of any vaccine reactions which is already a well-established strategy.

I'm not sure it will work out as planned as quickly as it needs to be put in place. The vaccine pushers are in a race against time, as more vaccines equals more vaccine reactions and more vaccine concerns, so the number of people who are worried and will speak out is continually expanding.

kathymuggle 07-13-2014 08:02 AM

I actually had a pro-vaxxer tell me that if the vaccine didn't take - so what? She had done her part.

If titres are a good indicator of who will and will not get the disease, then yes, they should be used more - much more!

Pertussis comes to mind (pregnancy excepted, perhaps, when the goal is to give the baby some immunity). A recent study in the UK showed that 20% of children who visited doctors for prolonged cough had pertussis. Looking back, I am fairly certain my husband had it about 5 years ago (no one else got it, despite our never-vaxxed or vaccine-was-long-ago status).

Chicken pox is another one - while I get this number may be in flux as the number of cases decrease - 1/7 people claim to have never had chicken pox, only to show antibodies on titre tests.

This discusses different classes of vaccines with regards to antibodies displayed post immunisation. I have not read the entire thing (thus will not discuss) but at first glance it looks full of useful info so I am sharing.

http://cid.oxfordjournals.org/content/47/3/401.long

In all honestly, I think the practical applications of titres are the most relevent for sel/delayed. They are the ones that might want to know if their kid had chicken pox before getting the vaccines; ditto pertussis. They are also relevent for people who need to demostrate immunity to xyz prior to entry into a program. One blood prick may save you some vaxxes. I can imagine vaccinated people getting titres in an outbreak (assuming tires were good indicators of immunity).

samaxtics 07-13-2014 09:06 AM

I agree Deborah, it is about controlling people and they get that by controlling the message. I finally got to watch "Hot Coffee" on Netflix that kathymuggle had mentioned previously. As consumers it is really an important documentary to watch
to see how deft at manipulating people these corporations are with the end result being that people are unwittingly giving up rights.

I do not see pharma being supportive of a program where titres are measured. Even here in Canada doctors are hesitant to order titre tests because it might raise red flags. smdh
If these titre tests keep coming back at zero (like they did for my child) more parents (but not all) will start questioning vaccines more. And they would have to revise the number (10%-which I think is an underestimate) of those who do not respond. Can't have reality interfering with the business model.

In Hot Coffee it opens with an interviewer asking people what they knew of the lawsuit interspersed with clips of tv shows mocking the lawsuit. Then they show the look on the people's faces as they show them
the graphic photos of that poor lady's burns. Everyone changes their mind about the validity of the lawsuit.

I think greed will eventually be the downfall of the vaccine program. They will keep adding more and more until the damage is so great and seen by everyone that it will be undeniable.

serenbat 07-13-2014 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kathymuggle (Post 17806250)
I actually had a pro-vaxxer tell me that if the vaccine didn't take - so what? She had done her part.

If titres are a good indicator of who will and will not get the disease, then yes, they should be used more - much more!

Pertussis comes to mind (pregnancy excepted, perhaps, when the goal is to give the baby some immunity). A recent study in the UK showed that 20% of children who visited doctors for prolonged cough had pertussis. Looking back, I am fairly certain my husband had it about 5 years ago (no one else got it, despite our never vaxxed or vaccine has run out status).

Chicken pox is another one - while I get this number may be in flux as the number of cases decrease - 1/7 people claim to have never chicken pox, only to show antibodies on titre tests.

This discusses different classes of vaccines with regards to antibodies displayed post immunisation. I have not read the entire thing (thus will not discuss) but at first glance it looks full of useful info so I am sharing.

http://cid.oxfordjournals.org/content/47/3/401.long

In all honestly, I think the practical applications of titres are the most relevent for sel/delayed. They are the ones that might want to know if their kid had chicken pox before getting the vaccines; ditto pertussis. They are also relevent for people who need to demostrate immunity to xyz prior to entry into a program. One blood prick may save you some vaxxes. I can imagine vaccinated people getting titres in an outbreak (assuming tires were good indicators of immunity).


thanks for adding the link!

Yes isn't it odd (several words really could fit here) that the only group routinely tested are those who are pregnant? AND not their immediate family members??? If it's good enough at that time---------well maybe some PRO/fully vaccinators will let us know!:wink:

Taximom5 07-13-2014 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by serenbat (Post 17807026)
thanks for adding the link!

Yes isn't it odd (several words really could fit here) that the only group routinely tested are those who are pregnant? AND not their immediate family members??? If it's good enough at that time---------well maybe some PRO/fully vaccinators will let us know!:wink:


I also think it's interesting that the only group that bothers to get titers done is the group that questions vaccine safety/efficacy.

bthuntamerc 07-13-2014 03:01 PM

Why I vaccinate
 
http://www.scientificamerican.com/me...thinking_2.jpg

http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...herd-thinking/

kathymuggle 07-13-2014 03:21 PM

And what do you think of titre testing, bhuntamerc?

tadamsmar 07-13-2014 03:33 PM

deleted

kathymuggle 07-13-2014 03:37 PM

Titres, folks.

The end.

serenbat 07-13-2014 04:32 PM

bthuntamerc



Since you vaccinate can you please answer the questions that were asked in the OP.

The herd meme is unrelated to this thread, it doesn't answer the questions, it doesn't even address vaccine failure and titers so I'm not sure what you posted it, can you please explain.

teacozy 07-13-2014 04:46 PM

I'll try and briefly answer, although I'm not 100% sure what you're asking.

I have not had my son's titres tested. I have no idea whether he is in the small percentage of people for who a certain vaccine didn't "take". Statistically he likely is, but I can't be sure. You can bet I don't want to test it and see.

Which is why I always found the anti vax question of "If you really think vaccines work then why do you care if my child is vaccinated or not?" question so ridiculous.

If, after two doses of the MMR for example, he wasn't immune to measles there wouldn't be anything I could do. I would just have to hope that enough people vaccinate to keep him from getting exposed to measles.

As far as I understand, there is no evidence that a third vaccine would give that remaining 1-5% immunity. Some people are just never going to get it from a vaccine (or from the wild virus either, I might add).

I had a friend that went through the IVF process and they tested her immunity for rubella and measles and she came back as having no immunity. She had only had one vaccine as a child so she got another one and they retested and she still didn't show any immunity. She was just unlucky. I only had one MMR too but I still have immunity to Measles and rubella over 20 years later.

Did I answer the question?

serenbat 07-13-2014 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by teacozy (Post 17807482)
I'll try and briefly answer, although I'm not 100% sure what you're asking.

I have not had my son's titres tested. I have no idea whether he is in the small percentage of people for who a certain vaccine didn't "take". Statistically he likely is, but I can't be sure. You can bet I don't want to test it and see.


Did I answer the question?

No, you did not really answer the questions. Why not test him?

You state you don't want to know if he is immune because you can do nothing about it. That would mean he is in that group that it did not take and thus he can spread it and not be identified as at risk at the same time. I find it odd that a parent who vaccinated doesn't want to know this. Actually really odd. Your child could become a spreader and also is much more likely to be seriously effected and it would be presumed because of this vaccine record to not be one at risk, when in fact those are the ones who we are told are MORE at risk. It makes no logical sense to me why not know.

As for the other questions - waning immunity, (regarding CP and Dtap, etc) you didn't answer if you are planing to re-booster early because of it? The CDC, etc are even saying there is early waning occurring, we know this to be real, the science is showing this.

Since the science is there (and even the CDC finds it acceptable to use testing) why not for school entry? If you child isn't immune to the CP, even though they had the vaccine, wouldn't you want the child to be removed along with the rest of the NON-vaccers when there is an outbreak? Seems logical to me that if a child doesn't have the immunity they should be treated in outbreaks just like the ones with exemptions. Why shouldn't they be?

One_Girl 07-13-2014 05:52 PM

I don't do titers and don't see the point if them since the chances of a vaccine not working are small and we don't live in an area where people have outbreaks in large numbers. I haven't heard that vaccines are failing except from non-vaxers on online chat sites so I am really not worried about that either. I also don't vaccinate for other people, just for myself and my dd to significantly decrease our chances of getting nasty preventable diseases. I've never met anybody who vaccinates for other people, this theory seems to be a non-vax one. If titers were free I may do them and if I wanted to travel out of country I'd strongly consider doing them otherwise I see no point. IMO, the chance of vaccine failure is too small for me to worry about.

It may seem unfair, and probably is unfair, to non-vaxers that a small percentage of children who were vaxed but didn't get immunity may not be excluded from school along with their non-vaxed kids but that doesn't really matter to me. If you want that changed you should tru to take it up with your local legislators.

kathymuggle 07-13-2014 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by One_Girl (Post 17807626)
I don't do titers and don't see the point if them since the chances of a vaccine not working are small and we don't live in an area where people have outbreaks in large numbers. I haven't heard that vaccines are failing except from non-vaxers on online chat sites so I am really not worried about that either. …..

It may seem unfair, and probably is unfair, to non-vaxers that a small percentage of children who were vaxed but didn't get immunity may not be excluded from school along with their non-vaxed kids but that doesn't really matter to me. If you want that changed you should tru to take it up with your local legislators.

Paragraph one:

This is not really true. The pertussis vaccine fails regularly - it is not as effective as people would like, nor does it last as long as people would like. This is easily verfiable with mainstream sources (here is one from pediatrics: http://pediatrics.aappublications.or...129/5/968.full).

Mumps is another one. The current estimate of efficacy is around 70% if I remember correctly. We are seeing outbreaks of mumps where virtually everyone is vaccinated with 2 shots. We expect to see more vaccinated than unvaccinated (due to the fact there are more vaxxed than unvaxxed) but everyone is out of whack. There are numerous threads on MDC in the last couple of months on mumps vaccine failure.

2. I had not thought of that. Hmmm.

There are two reasons not testing for titres bugs me.

1. Why take a vaccine risk, even if you think it is small, if you do not have to?

2. Occasionally, pro-vaxxers say some pretty nasty things - usually about how we are selfish, do not contribute to herd immunity, should not be allowed in public places, should stay away from newborns even if we are perfectly well, etc,. etc. If someone knows the mumps vaccine doesn't work well 30% of the time, and refuses to get a titre to check whether they are one of the 30%, that is fairly hypocritical. Glass houses, stones and all that. There are PVer who are UAVs and pro-vaxxers who are not UAV's. If you (general you) are not a UAV, then this does not apply to you.

Ratchet 07-13-2014 08:16 PM

I view vaccination as a public health issue. Which is always a balancing act. And usually a cost-benefit analysis. Checking titers costs a lot of money. Doing it out of pocket would cost me personally a lot of money. I have had my titers checked due to my job, all +, although in the past I had to get re-boostered for something (I don't recall what) and had then seroconverted on re-check. I have not run the numbers on at what level of failure, or what frequency of outbreaks, would the cost of checking everyone's titers be cost-effective for the benefit gained. Any research on that scale would be based on data from CDC and the manufacturers. since there are huge groups that look at this for a living, with masters degrees in public health, I imagine using these numbers they felt it to not be worth it. I am one of those people who follows the recommendations of groups like CDC, AHA, ADA, etc. I know people who work in those groups and while everything in healthcare is flawed, I have some faith in the system. I know I am in the minority on this belief here, but it is the answer to your question for me personally (and me as a benificiary of public health).

One_Girl 07-13-2014 08:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kathymuggle (Post 17807890)
Paragraph one:

This is not really true. Pertussis fails regularly - it is not as effective as people would like, nor does it last as long as people would like. This is easily verfiable with mainstream sources (here is one from pediatrics: http://pediatrics.aappublications.or...129/5/968.full).

Mumps is another one. The current estimate of efficacy is around 70% if I remember correctly. We are seeing outbreaks of mumps where virtually everyone is vaccinated with 2 shots - we expect to see more vaccinated than unvaccinated (due to the fact there are more vaxxed than unvaxxed) but everyone is out of whack. There are numerous threads on MDC in the last couple of months on mumps failure.

2. I had not thought of that. Hmmm.

There are two reasons not testing for titres bugs me.

1. Why take a vaccine risk, even if you think it is small, if you do not have to?

2. Occasionally, pro-vaxxers say some pretty nasty things - usually about how we are selfish, do not contribute to herd immunity, should not be allowed in public places, should stay away from newborns even if we are perfectly well, etc,. etc. If someone knows the mumps vaccine doesn't work well 30% of the time, and refuses to get a titre to check whether they are one of the 30%, that is fairly hypocritical. Glass houses, stones and all that. There are PVer who are UAVs and pro-vaxxers who are not UAV's. If you (general you) are not a UAV, then this does not apply to you.

I'm glad you brought this up because it reminded me that I didn't answer the part of the OP's question about why I don't give early boosters.

The article you linked is an opinion piece not a peer reviewed article published in a medical journal, there is a disclaimer at the bottom. I understand that some fringe doctors hold different opinions about the research. There are fringe people in every profession but those aren't the people I consider valid sources for research. I look to peer reviewed sources, the cdc, and my dd's pediatrician for up to date information because they are sources I consider valid. You can feel free to disagree with that but that isn't the point of the thread and if the OP is posting to actually gain insight into her questions about the choices people who believe in vaxing make, I would not be interested in derailing that very much.

I don't believe that there is much risk to vaccinating, the cdc statistics are different than the statistics you stated in your post and the statistics others have stated on different parts of this forum. You have the right to make your own risk assessment, not vaccinate your kids, and be horrified that I don't agree and find different sources valid and vaccine risk as almost non-existent. It really doesn't bother me what you choose to do for your family and I see no reason why my choices for my family should bother you.

It may be hypocritical to not get titers and to just let my dd go to school when there is a low chance of her not having immunity to a disease outbreak. I'm fine with being hypocritical though, I believe that humans are all hypocritical at one time or another so I'm really not bothered by being a hypocrite in this instance. If the law changes we will get titers, since it hasn't and there is no reason to I won't.

I am not sure why you implied that I was violating the user agreement. I know the guidelines have changed recently and are hard to keep track of in any case, but I believe that the moderators are now asking members to flag posts they believe are in violation without making accusations in posts. Please feel free to do so. I won't be offended at all. These subjects get heated and it is easy to type something offensive without thinking it through in the heat of the moment.

applejuice 07-13-2014 08:53 PM

There is currently a civil case against Merck filed by one of their own former employees who are whistleblowing because they were forced as researchers to lie about the efficacy of the mumps vaccine. If you think vaccines prevent disease and are a public health necessity, that should really concern you. No one benefits from that and it does not deserve your trust.

crazyms 07-13-2014 09:03 PM

Well I'm not specifically pro- or non- vax. I did the research from both sides and see the merits in them. We went selective/delayed vax because after my research that's where I came out. We have not had titers done. I have thought about it but my doctors are already so mad that I won't vax on their schedule that I haven't broached the subject. (We're actually changing doctors to a new hopefully better one now) I think it'd be great for the kids to have titers done after receiving a vaccination to see if it worked particularly before they receive the boosters that they may not need. I think that's why they aren't done more though because that would lose money if less shots were needed. Another thing I've considered when thinking about titers is that I do have concerns about some of the vaccinations. I've chosen to selective/delayed to help ease my concerns but I feel I'd be extremely disappointed at having taken the risk in getting the vaccinations and then found out they didn't even work. I have definitely considered it though and wish that titers were done at each and every vaccination since there's no reason to get the additional vaccination if it isn't necessary.

Note: I may sound anti-vax because of concerns over their safety and such but it's not just that. I feel the same way about any medications, supplements, additives, etc that go onto or into our bodies. I'd question whether it was necessary, helpful or safe in each situation to take Tylenol just as quickly as I question the vaccination. :)

beckybird 07-13-2014 10:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by One_Girl (Post 17807626)
the chances of a vaccine not working are small

But how can we really know for sure if nobody checks their titers? We don't know what percentage of the population is not immune and can therefore contract and spread diseases. There might be a large portion of the population without immunity.

One_Girl 07-13-2014 10:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beckybird (Post 17808306)
But how can we really know for sure if nobody checks their titers? We don't know what percentage of the population is not immune and can therefore contract and spread diseases. There might be a large portion of the population without immunity.

I believe we have a good idea of effectiveness rates through research. I don't feel that researchers need to test everybody worldwide to make valid claims about what they are researching.

serenbat 07-14-2014 05:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by One_Girl (Post 17807626)
I don't do titers and don't see the point if them since the chances of a vaccine not working are small and we don't live in an area where people have outbreaks in large numbers. I haven't heard that vaccines are failing except from non-vaxers on online chat sites so I am really not worried about that either. I also don't vaccinate for other people, just for myself and my dd to significantly decrease our chances of getting nasty preventable diseases. I've never met anybody who vaccinates for other people, this theory seems to be a non-vax one. If titers were free I may do them and if I wanted to travel out of country I'd strongly consider doing them otherwise I see no point. IMO, the chance of vaccine failure is too small for me to worry about.

It may seem unfair, and probably is unfair, to non-vaxers that a small percentage of children who were vaxed but didn't get immunity may not be excluded from school along with their non-vaxed kids but that doesn't really matter to me. If you want that changed you should tru to take it up with your local legislators.

few points - You don't live in an area with outbreaks in large numbers - in my state ONE case is an outbreak - for example CP - Actually a mom on here found me and told me what she was dealing with her unvaccinated kids, the one in the class with CP was vaccinated, but those who stayed out were the unvaccinated - talk about unfair, it sure is. Even "suspected" can warrant unvaccinated to stay out.

Glad to know you don't buy into that herd thing. Actually IMO it's the PROvaccers not the unvaccinated that push it, I see it a lot on here, good of society, for those who can't - all I see is from those who DO vaccinated.

Yes titer can be free, you need to ask, it's called cause. Most insurance companies will pay for them if a doctor requests them. I had it done, very easy - just ask!

serenbat 07-14-2014 05:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ratchet (Post 17807994)
I view vaccination as a public health issue. Which is always a balancing act. And usually a cost-benefit analysis. Checking titers costs a lot of money. Doing it out of pocket would cost me personally a lot of money. I have had my titers checked due to my job, all +, although in the past I had to get re-boostered for something (I don't recall what) and had then seroconverted on re-check. I have not run the numbers on at what level of failure, or what frequency of outbreaks, would the cost of checking everyone's titers be cost-effective for the benefit gained. Any research on that scale would be based on data from CDC and the manufacturers. since there are huge groups that look at this for a living, with masters degrees in public health, I imagine using these numbers they felt it to not be worth it. I am one of those people who follows the recommendations of groups like CDC, AHA, ADA, etc. I know people who work in those groups and while everything in healthcare is flawed, I have some faith in the system. I know I am in the minority on this belief here, but it is the answer to your question for me personally (and me as a benificiary of public health).

a few things - I got titers paid for by asking for it to be done and the Dr agreed, the insurance paid with no questions asked. Actually my MD said it's one of the easiest things to get insurance companies to pay for. I also had them done (not just one) when I was pregnant, again fully paid for that time too. They can be done and the cost in some cases is cheaper vs the vaccine at most pay for profit labs, my area has two - no script, just request and pay - easy!

serenbat 07-14-2014 05:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by One_Girl (Post 17808066)
I'm glad you brought this up because it reminded me that I didn't answer the part of the OP's question about why I don't give early boosters.

The article you linked is an opinion piece not a peer reviewed article published in a medical journal, there is a disclaimer at the bottom. I understand that some fringe doctors hold different opinions about the research. There are fringe people in every profession but those aren't the people I consider valid sources for research. I look to peer reviewed sources, the cdc, and my dd's pediatrician for up to date information because they are sources I consider valid. You can feel free to disagree with that but that isn't the point of the thread and if the OP is posting to actually gain insight into her questions about the choices people who believe in vaxing make, I would not be interested in derailing that very much.

I don't believe that there is much risk to vaccinating, the cdc statistics are different than the statistics you stated in your post and the statistics others have stated on different parts of this forum. You have the right to make your own risk assessment, not vaccinate your kids, and be horrified that I don't agree and find different sources valid and vaccine risk as almost non-existent. It really doesn't bother me what you choose to do for your family and I see no reason why my choices for my family should bother you.

It may be hypocritical to not get titers and to just let my dd go to school when there is a low chance of her not having immunity to a disease outbreak. I'm fine with being hypocritical though, I believe that humans are all hypocritical at one time or another so I'm really not bothered by being a hypocrite in this instance. If the law changes we will get titers, since it hasn't and there is no reason to I won't.

I am not sure why you implied that I was violating the user agreement. I know the guidelines have changed recently and are hard to keep track of in any case, but I believe that the moderators are now asking members to flag posts they believe are in violation without making accusations in posts. Please feel free to do so. I won't be offended at all. These subjects get heated and it is easy to type something offensive without thinking it through in the heat of the moment.


The recent outbreaks of measles, mumps WC have been among those in schools and those who were vaccinated, implying the risk is low really don't meet with reality of many sections here in the US currently.

serenbat 07-14-2014 05:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crazyms (Post 17808154)
Well I'm not specifically pro- or non- vax. I did the research from both sides and see the merits in them. We went selective/delayed vax because after my research that's where I came out. We have not had titers done. I have thought about it but my doctors are already so mad that I won't vax on their schedule that I haven't broached the subject. (We're actually changing doctors to a new hopefully better one now) I think it'd be great for the kids to have titers done after receiving a vaccination to see if it worked particularly before they receive the boosters that they may not need. I think that's why they aren't done more though because that would lose money if less shots were needed. Another thing I've considered when thinking about titers is that I do have concerns about some of the vaccinations. I've chosen to selective/delayed to help ease my concerns but I feel I'd be extremely disappointed at having taken the risk in getting the vaccinations and then found out they didn't even work. I have definitely considered it though and wish that titers were done at each and every vaccination since there's no reason to get the additional vaccination if it isn't necessary.

Note: I may sound anti-vax because of concerns over their safety and such but it's not just that. I feel the same way about any medications, supplements, additives, etc that go onto or into our bodies. I'd question whether it was necessary, helpful or safe in each situation to take Tylenol just as quickly as I question the vaccination. :)

Again, you can ask to have it done, the insurance company in most cases not the MD makes the decision for paying for it and you can look into on your own, it's really not that high a cost.

serenbat 07-14-2014 05:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by One_Girl (Post 17808370)
I believe we have a good idea of effectiveness rates through research. I don't feel that researchers need to test everybody worldwide to make valid claims about what they are researching.

I disagree.

How do you think that "research" is done?

What we are finings (the CDC does use links like Kathy posted) is when clinical trials are being done (prior to excepting the vaccine), titers are pulled. Later (as in the cases currently in the US) titers also pulled after outbreaks. Comparing the two is how we have had changes to the current schedule and thus the reason we now have MORE boosters vs what we did years ago.

The recently outbreaks are being tested with those who have been vaccinated, thus we know pertussis and mumps, etc are failing. You can find this info on the CDC site, some is still evolving because we have so many outbreaks. They do know the number of those who had been vaccinated too. It's quite real and definitely happening. They know about the waning too this way. When they know (as they do in several cases) what strain of vaccines where used, they know what ones are not working. Your doctor should have this information too to give you updates.

There have also been current threads here on this with links, I remember one where the whole family was vaccinated for WC, they went SEVERAL times before the were even tested to confirm it.


This is just ONE of many examples currently in the news - there are tons of examples for all the current VPD outbreaks, some have the numbers on them of the vaccinated ones that have come down the VPD.
http://triblive.com/news/healthnews/...#axzz37RdhSU3V
The CDC is investigating the waning effectiveness of the current pertussis inoculation, given as part of so-called DTap and Tdap vaccines. The agency is reviewing whether the vaccine could be ineffective on a particular pertussis strain, said CDC spokesman Jason McDonald.
The agency's standard vaccination recommendations could change depending on those investigations, though McDonald wasn't sure when they might be complete. Public health agencies still urge people to get the vaccines and booster shots.



---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
:scratch I do find it extremely hypocritical for those so anti-titer, did all of you refuse to test when you were pregnant?

If not, if you have/had a girl would you also tell her to not bother if she was pregnant? Or if you are just a mom of a father to be, wouldn't you want him to know if he could infect your future grandchild or just tell him it's not worth it?

What happens if you child (or you) now becomes one of those who does get a VPD and it spreads to an immune-compromised child, you did your part but you ended up being in the group that the vaccine failed in, wouldn't you have wanted to know?


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:05 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Resources saved on this page: MySQL 7.14%
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.