First off, let me say that I am not against the concept of vaccinating my children against diseases that are deadly or dibilitaing. I also believe conceptually that if the diseases are no longer prevalent due to widespread vaccinations that they are serving their purpose and protecting the majority of us and our children, at least in theory. Let me also state that I have a 10-year-old that had her vaccinations on time with no side-effects or repricussions.
With that being said, I am certainly not arguing that there are not adverse reactions to the vaccinations themselves, or the combination of vaccines given, or the timing of them. I am, however, like the rest of you, finding it difficult to find unbiased info, most likely because it would be unethical to do studies that would give us the concrete facts that we need, so we are forced to rely on secondary info and opinions.
I now have a 2-month-old and have become aware that there is concern over the vaccinations and also the timing of them. So far, the only difference between the vaccinations my 10-year-old had and the first set my 2-month-old had is the Pneumococcal Conjugate (Prevnar?) that I was told was to prevent menengitis which children can die from (I've heard of cases in recent years where people have died). Apparently, this has been "mandatory" in the last 5 years, according to our pediatrician.
I am not oposed to vaccinating in general, so I am not looking to start an argument as to why I shouldn't vaccinate my DD (that's another thread that I have already read through it's entirety and acknowledge the points on both sides). I am, however, interested in info on what diseases are serious if contracted and have vaccinations available to prevent. I am also curious to hear from others who believe in vaccinating but differ as to WHEN to vaccinate - what is the ideal schedule you would suggest and why?
The new vaccination I have a hard time with is Chicken Pox (Varicella?). I think the majority of us have had chicken pox as children, and for the majority who get it, my understanding is that it's not deadly or dibilitating, just itchy, sometimes scarring, and a lot of missed school. As adults, I understand it is more serious. I don't understand why we would vaccinate against something that is not serious in the majority of cases, and if we vaccinate as children and it doesn't take, wouldn't it cause more problems since more adults would get it? Perhaps, I am missing something and need more education on the reason for this vaccination. Same thing with the flu, although I don't believe the flu shot is "required" as of now. It's not deadly or dibilitating in most cases that I am aware of.
I'm not against vaccinating my children, I just want to make sure I understand the why behind each vaccination and will pick and choose which ones I am willing to do and which ones I am not. So far, I am not convinced that the Chicken Pox vaccination is necessary and will opt not to do that one unless I hear compelling reasons why I should, nor will I do the flu shot.
during the first 6 months of age your babys brain is still developing. if you vaccinate them during this time and they have a bad reaction. like mine did and now has autism then it could be too late it crosses the blood brain barrier. once in the brain it normally stays there. although I dont vaccinate and dont reccomend it its your decision so be informed. I dont persoally think you should get any vaccines b4 the age of 3. thats normally the safest point. moset of the reson theres problems from the shots now are that they are given too early.
the babys first shots are the HEPB shot and the MMR and they are given at the same time which is bad becouse the HEPB does still contain some mercury and the MMR contains live viruses. so your getting two horriable things at one time our babies are to young to be given shots with live viruses.
Last edited by moderator2; 07-07-2005 at 06:29 AM.
i'm also not against the concept of vaccination. as i am pregnant with my first child right now, i'm also weighing the risks and benefits of vaccination. i myself have been vaccinated and have never had an adverse reaction. i even had my tetanus booster a few months ago and other than a sore arm, didn't have any side effects.
i know that i will have my child vaccinated on the schedule that the pediatrician recommends.
as far as vaccinating a child against chicken pox and meningitis, that's where i'm torn.
i myself never had chicken pox, so i got vaccinated at age 14. my mother never had it either and she got vaccinated at 37. i think that if your child doesn't get chicken pox on his/her own, it's a good idea to vaccinate later in life because although chicken pox is pretty benign in childhood, it can be very serious when you are an adult, particularly in pregnancy.
personally i was vaccinated for meningitis while i was in college. that was because i lived in a dorm and there were a few outbreaks of the disease in other universities. so we were told that it was good to get vaccinated as a precaution.
this year was the first year i got the flu vaccine. my doctor recommended it for a few reasons:
1. i have asthma. and each time i get a cold, it tends to spread to my lungs and become an infection/bronchitis.
2. i'm a preschool teacher and am constantly in contact with viruses.
3. i was trying to conceive and didnt want to risk getting the flu if i was pregnant.
anyway, i just wanted to let you know my take on the whole thing. it's obviously a very private decision and i'm sure you're make the right choice with the help of your doctor and the research you do.
i'm really sorry that your child has autism. you have said in other posts as well as here that he got it as a result of being vaccinated.
i was just curious, how do you know that? have the two actually been linked in the case of your child?
i'm sure you have read my other posts in the arguments about vaccines thread. i'd just like to restate that i am not entirely opposed to vaccinations, but i think it is irresponsible of the medical community to vaccinate immediately at birth and periodically throughout infancy when a child's immune system, skeletal system and cerebral system are underdeveloped and immature.
first of all, if you have not experienced an infection or flare up of chicken pox, menengitis or the flu, hep B or any other disease, in the environments you live in on a daily basis, it is unlikely that your child would because you haven't but also because...
second, if YOU have been vaccinated for these diseases, or contracted them at some point (for example, chicken pox, flu, etc.) then you pass immunity on to your child if you breastfeed (known as passively aquired immunity) and this is sustained until breastfeeding has ceased. many infants become sick because the mother
*does not breastfeed at all (some women can't, i understand this, one of my closest friends was unable to breast feed her third child),
*breastfeeds but also includes juices or worse, soda (high in sugar which creates a highly favorable environment in the gut/intestines for infection)
*or includes other liquids and even other foods into an infant's diet before 6 months of age (according to La Leche League, a child can survive, quite happily and satisfied on breast milk alone for at least 6 months, and i personally lived in Africa for several months, working in villages were mothers soley breastfed their children for at least 6 months, and continued to breast feed for up to a year or more while introducing new foods. incidentally, actress helen hunt is still breastfeeding her 1 and 1/2 year old).
*or the mother stops breastfeeding early (weeks or months after birth)
third, many of the diseases that infants and children are *suggested* to be vaccinated against are not deadly, are reversible and treatable. while it is true that an infant has an immature immune, skeletal and cerebral system, the cold/flu, chicken pox, etc. are still treatable. and even very harmful diseases such as menengitis, the child will receive passively aquired immunity from breastfeeding. even if you are not breastfeeding...
four, vaccination deliberately bypasses the first four stages of defense (1) the skin, (2) the mucous membranes, (3) the gut lymphoids and (4) the lymphatic system (kidneys, liver, spleen, lymph nodes, etc.) and deposits the vaccine (some which include neurotoxins, like thimerosal and others, as well as some that include only partially deactivated antigens) directly into the blood stream of a newborn or infant, giving it immediate circulation throughout the entire body (brain, lungs, limbs, organs, etc.) of an immature baby. this seems ludicris to me.
lastly, as i stated before, many in the medical community have admitted that the medical community is still unaware of what antibodies are good for, except to show that something has entered the system of a human being. they do not provide or prove or establish immunity. so to assume that vaccines are effective, or more alarmingly to assume they are safe, because of the presence of antibodies, is ignorant and irresponsible.
for all these reasons i would wait until you're child is significantly more developed to pursue vaccines. also, please realize that when you were born, you did not receive nearly as many vaccines or at such an early age, (this is easily accessible public information about the change in vaccination schedules over the years) and you are just fine. also, even in the past 5 years, 10 years, 15 years, much more has been learned and instituted as far as general health, hygiene and safety, preventing infection for most people in developed nations, and allowing for treatment incase of infection, despite vaccines. many of them today seem, to me, outdated and unnecessary.
best of luck making an informed decision.
if you have the time, or care to, read the article "Death By Lethal Vaccine Injection", it's one woman's personal account, very compelling.
Why would they put aborted fetuses in them? I don't understand the purpose of that. I checked the ingredients and did not see that one on there. I was also told that there was no mercury in the shots my DD received, including the HepB shot (perhaps I was given wrong info?). I specifically asked about that. The MMR is not in the first set of shots and isn't given until the baby is at least one year old; it doesn't take before then.
I'm sorry to hear that your baby has autism. I am certainly not disputing that this does happen. Do you mind if I ask after which set of shots (which age) did you notice signs, or was it a gradual thing? I am trying to weigh the pros against the cons to make an informed decision as to which shots to get and when.
jriegel, I am one of those women who is unable to breastfeed, but your points are well taken and are a good argument for waiting to vaccinate anyhow. How long would you suggest waiting, and for which particular vaccines? I like the idea of waiting on the chicken pox vaccination in particular. nastabasta has a good point on that. I'm not sure when they are "scheduled" to ge that one, but I'd like to give DD a chance to get the chicken pox in childhood. I don't know much about the new menangitis one, but I have of people who have died from menangitis in recent years. Also, you mention that some of the diseases if contracted are not deadly or dibilitating. Can you be more specific as to which ones, besides the chicken pox?
I just researched the CDC website for what diseases we are supposed to vaccinate for and when and thought I'd share some of the info and conclusions I've come to for my own family.
The Varicella (chicken pox) vaccine is supposed to be given at 12-18 months, but the website also indicates that cases are more severe in people older than 13, although that's not to say that there are not severe cases in younger children and infants. I'm going to wait until DD is 10 for that one if she doesn't get the chicken pox.
I found it ironic that the Pneumococcal Conjugate (new meningitis strand) is supposed to be given at 2 months, 4 months, 6 months and 12-18 months, however, in the section of the same website that discusses Meningococcal Disease (the one the vaccine is for) it indicates that "the vaccine is recommended for all persons over 65 years of age and younger persons at least 2 years old with certain medical problems. There is a newly licensed vaccine...that appears to be effective in infants for the prevention of pneumococcal infections and is routinely recommended for all children greater than 2 years of age." If they indicate "greater than 2 years," why would they give the series of shots from 2 months to 18 months? DD had the first one in the series at 2 months, but I think I'm going to wait until she's 2 for the rest.
I couldn't seem to find much info on the CDC website on Hepatitis B except that it appears to be contracted through bodily fluids (including saliva) and is classified mainly as a sexually transmitted disease. The part that I don't understand is that the CDC indicates that 30% of children who contract this disease get it at age 1-6 years. How do they get it at that age? I guess since it is transmitted through saliva as well, they could get it if they share a drink with someone who has it, but it isn't prevalent in the US, according to the website, so I'm not sure that DD needs this vaccination as an infant. She's already had 2 of the 3 shots, though. Anyone know more about this?
DTaP and Poliovirus are dibilitating/deadly diseases according to the info on the CDC website, so I'll continue with those on schedule. I think I'll also continue with Haemophilus influenza type b (HIB) since it's a pretty harsh disease as well. My 10-year-old had these on the same schedule and was fine with them.
I haven't made up my mind on the MMR yet. I may delay that one too, but that one doesn't come up for a year so I have some time to think about it.
lynn, I'm not sure I understand your question. I didn't see much about statistics of people dying of meningitis, however, I have heard of a few cases in recent years (perhaps about 5?). There are different types of meningitis and only certain virus strands have vaccinations (HIB and Pneumococcal Conjugate vaccinations are for meningitis). The percentage I stated is for Hepatitis B and that was to say that 30% of children who contract it get it between the ages of 1 and 6. It's difficult to decipher when dealing with percentages because they don't specify the population (total number of babies), the number of children who contract HepB (as oposed to adolescents, adults or seniors), nor the number who contract it between the ages of 1 and 6 - all they list are percentages. 30% could mean 3 out of only 10 or 3,000,000 out of 10,000,000. I'm not sure how many people die from it. I found my info on www.cdc.gov, which is the center for disease control website. That is the only one I have checked so far. Feel free to check it out for yourself. There is a lot of good info on there, but keep in mind that they also promote vaccinating according to the schedule that pediatricians follow, so that's the perspective you're gettng from that website. I was looking for info on the diseases themselves, if they are dibilitating/deadly, and at what ages they are most serious, to determine if/when to vaccinate DD. I think it's impossible to find accurate info on how many infants have severe adverse reactions to immunizations, as you may also find in reading through some of the threads on this board. You have to make your own decisions based on the info you are able to find. I will vaccinate DD for the majority of vaccinations, but I will insist on a later schedule for some of the vaccinations. I think that one of the biggest arguments is that we vaccinate too soon and for too many at once, although the other side of the coin is that some of the ingredients in the vaccinations themselves may cause severe adverse reactions. I need to research that side a little more.
i'm really impressed with how carefully you are considering all the issues - you're a good mama!
i can't remember if i mentioned (i have elsewhere, at least) that i have a friend my age (mid twenties) who was crippled and disfigured by the DTP vaccine. he was a healthy infant, completely normal, and it disfigured every thing from the neck down and stunted his growth, he has been in an electric wheelchair ever since, and receiving government stipends. this really scares me, personally. he actually contracted polio from the vaccine. it is miraculous that he is completely normal in his facial structure, skull and is perfectly normal (as normal as you can be in his situation) mentally. the whole thing is very sad to me.
as far as the hep b goes, i could only imagine a child younger than 6 getting it if they are born to a mother who already has it, or born to a mother/family that has a lifestyle which increases the risk. if a friend of the family has hep b, it's unlikely that the child would share drinks or kisses with them unless the friend is really close to the family (more like a family member). personally, i will not vaccinate for hep b, at least until they are 10 or older. i was not vaccinated for it until i was a senior in highschool, and only because i was moving overseas.
overall, i would honestly suggest waiting until the child is at least 3 to begin any vaccination. dyptheria and thyphoid are practically non existent in the united states, mostly because of increased understanding of germs, contamination and infection of the past few decades. as far as polio and menengitis (i know the DTP can't be broken up) i would really research the risks and how a person or child is most likely to contract it (conditions, environment, sensitivities, etc.) and make a judgement of whether it would really be necessary at such a young age if the child will be with you and in your home almost 100% of the time.
overall, i have known too many people in my life (my friend in the wheel chair for example, as well as several friends both overseas and in the states who have huge divots in their arms from a local infection caused by a vaccination) and autistic children i worked with in highschool, that it just seems to me the risk is too great to assault the immune system of an infant or toddler like that. the CDC, FDA and pharmaceutical companies call it a risk "for the greater good". the numbers of children negatively affected by vaccines (mild irriations, seizures, autism and death) is staggeringly high (in the thousands per vaccination, and vaccinations are given daily, so this number is incredibly high) for the sake of the small few who inspite of greater awareness of cleanliness, hygeine, infections, etc. since vaccine schedules began, despite the majority being born to mothers or into families who have very low risk for the serious infections (polio, hep b, etc) might possibly by some weird random chance contract something. while those few children who might possibly contract something if they weren't vaccinated (at least not at an early age) and their families might be devastated if it did happen, hundreds of thousand more a year are devastated by the seizures, autsim and death.
i feel like "the greater good" harms more children than the number that would contract something if there were no vaccinations, especially in this day and age. unfortunately, there is an ocean of cover up because the pharmaceutical companies would crumble and the FDA officials would be exposed (they already are, there are plenty of publicly accessible documents) but after being told for decades that "this is what good mothers do", it's a hard pill to swallow that it could actually be dangerous. i think there are way more negative reactions to vaccines than are reported because doctors often swallow what they are told by sales reps from the drug companies and pass it on to parents telling them it's safe and it was just a freak reaction or something unrelated, so the parents are made to feel paranoid or irresponsible. and the article "Death By Lethal Vaccine Injection" sheds some light on the lack of blame placed on vaccines in the autopsies of babies who died from SIDS. this is a hot topic, as well. the author of the article encourages anyone who doubts to read the reports for themselves - there is a shockingly high number of babies who die from SIDS at 2, 4 and 6 months (the CDC and NIH even say this) which is exactly when most babies are scheduled for vaccines. i'm not saying vaccines are the only cause, but i think it's significant enough and shameful the way it is never discussed or questioned.
I got the varicella vaccination at age seven because I never had chicken pox, and I was deathly terrified of contracting it as an adult because the disease proves far more serious and fatal. Children actually can die from chicken pox complications such as pneumonia, even though it's very rare. You might just want to do it to be on the safe side, and I recommend getting this shot, but let me tell you, that the varicella vaccination was by far the most painful shot that I have received to this day! Goes deep in the muscle. I agree that you might want to wait awhile to see if your kid ever gets exposed to chicken pox, but I'd say that if he/she hasn't had it by the age of 8, to go ahead with the shot. When I got the shot in 1994 (I'm 18 now) it was brand new and not even required. I'm surprised that it's now required for kids. Obviously adults and teens who have never had the disease would need it, but I'd think that this would be the parent's decision in the end instead of the doctor's...
"Not everything that steps out of line, and thus 'abnormal,' must necessarily be 'inferior.'"
Last edited by GatsbyLuvr1920; 07-11-2005 at 08:23 PM.
Gatsby, that's what I was thinking too. I'll give her a chance to get it in childhood, but if she doesn't, I'll get her the vaccine around 8-10. I agree, that one should be optional and certainly 2 is too young for that one, so I will insist on waiting.