MN child dies from Haemophilus B; four others sick

[Sillygirl]

Here's the story:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/01/23/hib.vaccine.cdc/index.html

Of the five sick kids, three were unvaccinated by their parent's choice. One had an immune deficiency and the other was too young to have had the full series.

HiB infections kill one in twenty children who contract the disease.

It's described as a "rare" infection but until the vaccine came along, it was unfortunately rather common.

[tmonroe]

Thanks for posting this! We spaced out DD's vaccines but this was one the pediatrician felt was necessary. It's also one of the few vaccines with the least side effects. How unfortunate for the family who lost their child. My heart goes out to them.

[SnuggleBuggles]

I follow the Dr. Sears' schedule (for the most part) and this is one vax that I did on time, or at least very close. The Sears' book is so great about really explaining why the vaccine is important (public health? untreatable?...). Poor families. There really are no perfect answers, imo, on these sorts of issues (vaccines have risks, diseases have risks) but you always hope to make an educated decision and have things turn out ok.

Beth

[MarisaSF]

We spaced out DD's vaccines but this was one the pediatrician felt was necessary.

Same situation here. My DS got the 1st HiB shot at 6 months, which was later than recommended, but we agreed with our ped that it was important.

Four dosages had been recommended, but now apparently there is a shortage, so my kids will only get three each. Is this what other parents have been told now? 3 instead of 4?

[gatorsmom]

Ugh! Why do all the really rare illnesses seem to occur up here in Minnesota? I'll have to look into this and find out what counties these occurrences were in. I know that there are pockets of like-minded parents who have delayed or not vaccinated their children by choice in the southern suburbs of the cities. I don't know of any up here in the northern suburbs, so I"m hoping this wasn't local to us.

I just read in a Minnesota-based parenting magazine 15 minutes ago (and now can't find the magazine to save my life), that due to less strict laws preventing parents from opting out of vaccinations, 5% of children in Minnesota are not vaccinated at all or are not vaccinated according to the usual schedule. If I were sick with a disease that relied on the herd effect from vaccinations, I"D BE PISSED if I caught something from someone who opted out and hoped for protection because of the herd effect. I respect parent's choices, really I do, but when lives are at stake, I think we have a duty to each other. I definitely think more stringent laws to prevent opting out should be passed around here. All my children have their vaccinations up to date. And, this is the first I've heard of the shortage of Hib shots. The twins were born November of 2007 and have all their shots up to date.

[jenny]

Stupid question, but what does herd immunity mean? If your child is up-to-date on all his vaccines, is he still at risk of contracting something if he comes in contact with a child who has a disease?

[brittone2]

Hib also causes lots of asymptomatic infection and occurs in many people's nasal passages naturally without any serious effect. Pre-vax, most people were exposed and had natural immunity. Some cases did become serious and yes, it can result in death.

1998-2000, 32% of those 6-59 months who had confirmed Hib had all 3 doses. Reason for vax failure unknown. (from the CDC's pink book)

BFing rates have also gone up considerably since the late 80s and early 90s (and no, I'm not saying that's why Hib decreased as much as it did). BFing is known to be protective against Hib (not always, but it helps reduce the rate from everything I've read, including the CDC's info). Many moms today have natural immunity to Hib from their childhood. I'm curious what will happen down the road when many children today don't have natural immunity? Will BFing still be as protective? What impact will it have?

I'd be curious to see the data on incidence of bacterial meningitis (of all types) vs Hib caused meningitis.

From the CDC:

Because Hib vaccines protect against serotype b organisms only, serotype should be determined and reported for all H. influenzae isolates.

Serotyping distinguishes encapsulated strains, including Hib, from unencapsulated strains, which cannot be serotyped. The six encapsulated serotypes (designated a–f) have distinct capsular polysaccharides that can be differentiated by slide agglutination with type-specific antisera.

Serotyping by slide agglutination can sometimes be inaccurate, especially since it is not performed routinely in most laboratories. One study found that 28 (70%) of 40 Hi isolates from ABCs sites that had been reported as “Hib” to CDC were actually nontypeable Hi isolates.11 Another study found discrepancies between the results of slide agglutination subtyping performed at state health departments and those of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) capsule typing performed at CDC for 56 (40%) of 141 isolates.12 Accurate serotype data on all Hi isolates from children younger than 5 years of age is critical for monitoring Hib vaccine effectiveness. These studies emphasize the importance of quality control and quality assurance in laboratory serotyping.

ABC=Active Bacterial Core surveillance program

During the same period, this surveillance system indicated a rapid decline (93%) in the race-adjusted rates of all invasive Hi disease (including serotypes b and non-b) among children (from 41 cases per 100,000 to three cases per 100,000). Among children aged less than 5 years, the number of Hib cases declined by 98% (from 281 cases in 1989 to seven cases in 1993); the number of cases of non-type b Hi declined by 63% (from 52 cases in 1989 to 19 cases in 1993). Of the four Hib cases among children for whom Hib vaccination status has been determined, one had received the complete primary series.

If Hib only protects against the b strain, why the major reduction of non type b Hi infection that went along with it?

How accurate was the serotyping (Hib vs. other serotypes??) that went on in the past? I've never seen documentation about the 20,000 cases in the past and how it broke down by age. Lots of older children and adults circulated Hib regularly. eta: How many of those are counted in the 20,000?
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/440276

So far supposedly no major uptick in Hia cases , but some references here about concerns that it could happen (discusses officials that have raised concern about the possibility for "replacement disease" to rise up)
http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/428064

And it is happening already with Prevnar. It protects against only 7 strains. New and resistant strains are rising to fill up the void created.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2007-09-17-2472804019_x.htm
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17456820?dopt=AbstractPlus
http://blogs.wsj.com/health/2007/09/18/vaccine-paves-way-for-drug-resistant-infection/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18847402?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsP anel.Pubmed_DiscoveryPanel.Pubmed_Discovery_RA&linkpos=4&log$=relatedreviews&logdbfrom=pubmed
So with Prevnar they are talking about a new vax that protects against more strains. But in time, what happens when we get new mutations with that? Do we keep adding new versions to the schedule? In the meantime are they creating a bigger vacuum for something else to take hold and become more prominent or resistant?

I have lots of questions about the whole Hib thing. Again, not minimizing the seriousness of it all.

Marisa-
===============================================
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2008 Nov 21;57(46):1252-5. Links
Continued shortage of Haemophilus influenzae Type b (Hib) conjugate vaccines and potential implications for Hib surveillance--United States, 2008.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
In December 2007, Merck & Co., Inc. (West Point, Pennsylvania) announced a voluntary recall of certain lots of two Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) conjugate vaccines, PedvaxHIB (monovalent Hib vaccine) and Comvax (Hib-HepB vaccine) and suspended production of both vaccines, disrupting the U.S. supply of Hib vaccine. When the recall was announced, Merck projected restoration of these vaccines to the U.S. market in late 2008. To ensure that enough vaccine would be available for all U.S. children to complete the primary Hib vaccination series, on December 18, 2007, CDC recommended that providers defer the booster dose of Hib vaccine (scheduled for administration at age 12-15 months) for all children except those at increased risk for invasive Hib disease. On October 17, 2008, Merck announced that restoration of the two vaccines to the market would be delayed until mid-2009. Because the continued delay might result in an increase in Hib disease, national surveillance for invasive Hib disease has become particularly important. To assess the current status of surveillance for Hib nationally, CDC reviewed 4,657 cases of invasive H. influenzae infection reported during January 2007-October 2008, including 748 cases among children aged <5 years. Of those 748 cases, 45 (6.0%) were Hib (serotype b), and 278 (37.2%) were missing serotype information. The continued vaccine shortage heightens the need for timely reporting and investigation of H. influenzae cases and accurate serotyping of all invasive H. influenzae isolates in children aged <5 years.

[brittone2]

I"D BE PISSED if I caught something from someone who opted out and hoped for protection because of the herd effect. I respect parent's choices, really I do, but when lives are at stake, I think we have a duty to each other. I definitely think more stringent laws to prevent opting out should be passed around here. All my children have their vaccinations up to date. And, this is the first I've heard of the shortage of Hib shots. The twins were born November of 2007 and have all their shots up to date.

Should we mandate that all moms BF since it is considered very (no, not 100%) protective against Hib?

What about those of us who have ethical questions about what happens when new (eta: strains of) diseases emerge (like the 19A strain increasing w/ Prevnar http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2007-09-17-2472804019_x.htm )

Should I be able to blame vaccinating parents or pharma companies if my child contracts this? What about other strains that may rise up that don't just cause a drug-resistant ear infection?

I'm not asking this in a nasty tone...I'm asking because I truly think it poses an interesting ethical dilemma. I don't think it is an easy decision

eta: from http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol5no3/lipsitch.htm#Ref
Conjugate vaccines have reduced the incidence of invasive disease caused by Haemophilus influenzae, type b (Hib), in industrialized countries and may be highly effective against Streptococcus pneumoniae. However, the serotype specificity of these vaccines has led to concern that their use may increase carriage of and disease from serotypes not included in the vaccine. Replacement has not occurred with the use of Hib vaccines but has occurred in trials of pneumococcal vaccines.

also

In principle, replacement could occur with bacteria that differ from the vaccine targets not only in serotype but in species. Indeed, one of the studies of bacterial antagonism in the nasopharynx concentrated on interactions between species rather than between serotypes of the same species (30). Furthermore, even if replacement is limited to members of the same species, the serotypes that increase may tend to cause a disease different from that caused by vaccine-type organisms (e.g., otitis rather than pneumonia or bacteremia). Therefore, as conjugate vaccines are used, changes in diseases attributable to organisms that colonize the nasopharynx should be monitored.


They do discuss that while they haven't noticed this occurring yet with Hib, it is a concern.

Are we replacing one problem with another? Does nature fill the void created when we minimize certain strains that have commonly circulated?

edited again to add:
Uptick in Hi(f)?

Infectious Diseases in Clinical Practice:Volume 16(4)July 2008pp 264-265
Haemophilus influenzae Serotype f Septic Arthritis, Meningitis, and Bacteremia in a Healthy Adult: An Emerging Pathogen?
[Case Reports]
McGuinn, Marcella MD*†; Kanaparthy, Kalyana MD*
http://www.infectdis.com/pt/re/idcp/abstract.00019048-200807000-00017.htm;jsessionid=J9Dh8slN609cq6GFCbW2FJNzkSwvq 020G380ZCF3frJ14JPQkkQG!-1854079795!181195628!8091!-1

With the reduction in Haemophilus influenzae serotype b invasive infections in vaccinated populations, it is possible that additional serotypes may begin to cause disease. We describe a case of H. influenzae serotype f septic arthritis, meningitis, and bacteremia in a healthy adult and examine the possibility of this strain as an emerging pathogen.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17438440?ordinalpos=23&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsP anel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum
Invasive infections due to Haemophilus influenzae non-type b have been reported to be on the increase with the decline in invasive H.influenzae type b infections after the introduction of the conjugate H.influenzae type b vaccine. We report a case of H. influenzae type f sepsis in a fully immunized, immunocompetent, and previously healthy 9-month-old child.

Clin Infect Dis. 2007 Jun 15;44(12):1611-4. Epub 2007 May 2. Links
Characterization of invasive Haemophilus influenzae disease in Manitoba, Canada, 2000-2006: invasive disease due to non-type b strains.

Tsang RS, Sill ML, Skinner SJ, Law DK, Zhou J, Wylie J.
Vaccine Preventable Bacterial Diseases, National Microbiology Laboratory, Public Health Agency of Canada, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada. [email protected]
In addition to the proportional increase in cases of non-type b Haemophilus influenzae disease in the post-H. influenzae type b vaccine era, the incidence of invasive H. influenzae disease was found to be approaching the rates of H. influenzae type b disease that were documented in the prevaccine period. Fifty-six percent of invasive disease now occurs in individuals aged >10 years.


from: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1448631

However, surveillance for invasive H. influenzae disease in Canada captures only cases due to Hib, and there is limited information on the prevalence or incidence of invasive H. influenzae disease due to non-type b H. influenzae. Currently, it is not known if Hib vaccination alters the epidemiology of invasive H. influenzae disease by inducing capsule replacement. Capsule replacement in H. influenzae disease has been reported from at least two countries (Brazil and Portugal) after extensive use of the Hib vaccine (2, 25). Also, questions have recently been raised in an editorial comment (4) postulating that non-type b H. influenzae isolates are becoming a more common cause of invasive H. influenzae disease. This raises the question of what the appropriate public health response is to invasive non-type b H. influenzae disease.

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1448631

[motherofone]

The herd effect is immunity that occurs when enough people in a community are vaccinated so that unvaccinated or immune-compromised individuals are protected. Since the disease can't take hold in a community where most people are immunized, there is less chance that someone will come in contact with a contagious person. For example if there were a measles outbreak, it would probably not turn into an epidemic because so many people have been immunized. Babies, people with weak immune systems and non-immunized people could get sick but the disease will be contained because the chain of infection is limited and there aren't a lot of contagious people to spread it. If I got measles and sneezed on an immunized person, he would not get measles. Then, if a non-immunized person came in contact with him, she also wouldn't get measles-because my sneeze victim didn't get the disease and become contagious. This third person is experiencing the benefits of herd immunity.
If enough people in a community aren't protected, than herd immunity breaks down. This is why people who work in public health prefer that everyone who can get vaccinated does. This protects those who can't get vaccinated such as newborns and transplant patients and those who had vaccines that didn't work.
I always found it odd that parents who eschew vaccines for whatever reason try to convince others that it is a good idea. They should hope that everyone they and their kid comes in contact with has risked the vaccine.

[scrooks]

That was a great explaination of herd immunity and I agree with you completely!

It does always scare me that vaccines aren't 100% effective and maybe I've done everything I can to protect my child but they still may get sick because maybe my child's vaccine didn't happen to work.

[gatorsmom]

I'm not asking this in a nasty tone...I'm asking because I truly think it poses an interesting ethical dilemma. I don't think it is an easy decision



Brittone,
I know you enough now to know that you aren't asking in a nasty tone. My post was worded in such a way that I did throw the ball out there and expected someone to run with it because, well, I agree with you. This is a very interesting situation and there are some situations in society I'm pondering now which I think parallel this- how much should society dictate the choices we make in our lives? This needs further exploration.

The vaccination question is interesting to me because it touches close to home in a couple of ways: my children are little and are being vaccinated now and because not that long ago my mother, while undergoing chemo, was severely immune-compromised and reliant on herd immunity. Also, I just recently had very small twin babies and with 2 older kids in preschool, we rely heavily on the fact that the other kids in those classes are immunized (in fact, I asked the teachers if there were unvaccinated children in my sons' classes before they started school. I wouldn't have sent them to that school iif there had been).


Now, to address a couple of your points: should we mandate BFing for all moms to protect against HIb? Well, obviously, you know that bfing isn't possible for everyone so that's not a good solution to protecting against Hib. And there will always be exceptions to every rule that occur. Is it better to go into surgery without anesthesia because there's that 1/10,000 chance you may have a fatal reaction to the anesthesia? Or how about you are diagnosed with cancer and the doctor gives you 95% chance of dying in the next 5 years if you do nothing- is that 5% chance of doing nothing even worth considering?

There will always be exceptions. If we all were afraid of those rare situations, NO one would be immunized. How would THAT affect our population? Every time I vaccinate one of my children, I run the risk of something bad happening as a result of that vaccination. Yet I do it anyway because the odds of that happening are slim. And I do the vaccinations because I feel as a good citizen it's my duty.

Now, obviously, there are going to be cases where people run a higher risk of being injured by vaccinations. And those people deserve special treatment. And I think stricter laws could protect those people while forcing the rest of us to do our duty to "the herd." Specifically I mean in my state. Since I can't find that dang article I was reading today, I can't remember which states in particular have tighter controls over opting out, but I remember specifically that my state's laws are some of the most relaxed in the country.

In regards to resistent strains evolving as a result of using the vaccinations, there is a risk. It may happen, it may not. Are we willing to stop vaccinations in order to avoid that chance? If we do stop vaccinations, what, then are the odds of the population being harmed by outbreaks of polio, Hib, pertussis, etc.? Much, much greater, i'm fairly certain.

And let's talk about the fairness of those types who don't vaccinate at all. Unless someone can be proven to be harmed by a vaccine, it is very, very unfair for someone not to get immunized, imo. We all share the same risk of the rare complication. Everyone who gets immunized runs that risk. Is it fair, then, that others decide they don't want to run that risk, but will be protected by those of us who have risked being harmed by the vaccine? It's a gamble, but the odds are small (again, I understand that this is not true for everyone) that healthy individuals will be harmed by a vaccine. Would it have been fair to my family if last January, when my twins were 8 weeks old, that they were made sick because one family in my son's preschool class decided not to vaccinate? I've vaccinated my kids as much as I can, playing the odds, and then someone who decides to ride on my family's immunity infects my babies? That's precisely why my children will not be going to school with unvaccinated children (if I have immuno-compromised people in my family). It's just not fair.

I hope I don;t come off as attacking, I'm just tired and I feel pretty strongly about this subject for the reasons I mentiond before. So, I apologize in advance if I've upset anyone.

[Naranjadia]

It does always scare me that vaccines aren't 100% effective and maybe I've done everything I can to protect my child but they still may get sick because maybe my child's vaccine didn't happen to work.

If it makes you feel any better, when I was researching pertussis outbreaks, I did find that children with immunizations had milder, non-life threatening cases of whooping cough. So it was still protection, just not complete protection. I don't know if that is also the case with other diseases that "break through" the immunization.

[brittone2]

My mom actually just tested allergic (and this was by a top notch research university medical system) as *highly* allergic to thimerosal. (she was getting a panel for other reasons and that was something she didn't even know they were testing her for). Interesting. Even most thimerosal free vaxes still contain trace thimerosal.

I don't think your state is likely all that unique. 20+ states now allow philosophical exemptions in addition to the 48 that currently allow a religious exemption.

I have stated before that in the event of an outbreak, I would not vaccinate my children. That is part of my personal religious conviction.

In terms of new strains evolving or filling in the vacuum, it is already happening w/ Prevnar (the new strain is actually documented...19A). It isn't a hypothetical. Right now the new strain is causing highly drug resistant ear infections. What about when something else fills that void that is even more serious than an ear infection? Quite possible. There are plenty of researchers with concern that it could be the case (heck, the CDC is concerned about it). Some researchers believe it is happening with Hib (strains a through f becoming more common now that b has decreased), but it is less clear there vs. the situation w/ Prevnar. There are researchers that believe this has happened w/ pertussis as well. There have also been breakthrough cases of many diseases even in fully vaccinated populations that no one has been able to trace to an unvaxed kid. It still happens. Diseases mutate.

What are the effects of pushing some childhood illnesses like chicken pox possibly into adulthood? Vax induced immunity may wear off with time, and then we're faced with adults who don't always stay current on boosters, etc. While there can be serious cases of chicken pox in young children, most do fine. Many adults do not fare well at all. Rubella...natural vs. vaxed immunity are very different. A significant percentage of women won't get immunity no matter how many rubella vaxes they receive. But if they had natural immunity from childhood (when Rubella is generally considered pretty mild), it wouldn't be an issue. So now we have the problem of my kids perhaps not being able to obtain natural immunity vs. moms without natural immunity relying on herd immunity from those who vaccinate.

Ask the parents who feel their children were vax damaged or peruse the VAERS database sometime (and know that even the FDA and CDC acknowledge that vaccine adverse event reporting is probably drastically under reported) how they feel. (eta: the estimates I've seen are 10% of adverse reactions are actually reported to VAERS) Who has more of a "right" to their beliefs and decisions?

I know we're not going to agree.

eta: with respect to pertussis:
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol6no5/pdf/srugo.pdf
The effects of whole-cell pertussis vaccine wane after 5 to 10 years, and infection in a vaccinated person causes nonspecific symptoms (3-7). Vaccinated adolescents and adults may serve as reservoirs for silent infection and become potential transmitters to unprotected infants (3-11). The whole-cell vaccine for pertussis is protective only against clinical disease, not against infection (15-17). Therefore, even young, recently vaccinated children may serve as reservoirs and potential transmitters of infection

off to bed.

[Radosti]

Brittone, when reading your posts, I keep thinking that you were born a century too late. It seems you would prefer that everyone go back to the Pre-Vaccine era where everyone acquires immunity through exposure/illness to the wild type diseases. While I admire the fact that you are at least sticking with your decisions (while many who chose to delay or skip the vaccine are now running to the ped for shots - like it would actually help in such a short amt of time), I keep wondering how you became so anti-vaccine.

And full disclosure, I am an Infectious Disease microbiologist who spends her days making vaccines. I am immensely proud of my work and feel that I am performing a life-saving service to mankind. I became interested in vaccines when I was 10 years old. I lived in Ukraine and my Great Dane puppy had received her shots according to schedule. However, it turned out that the batch of Canine Distemper virus that the vets in our city received was useless. Distemper infection came in and within a week spread like wildfire through the city. Countless pets and strays were dead, people were bleaching their shoes and washing their hands constantly in an effort to stop the rapid spread of the disease. Our own puppy was nursed back from the brink of death by a very dedicated nurse who was a close friend of the family. That experience taught me how important vaccines are and shaped my life.

[m448]

Lisa how comfortable do you feel knowing you are in contact with immunocompromised people and yet you and your children may be receiving live vaccines that shed and could expose those same people you are trying to protect?

Also you've mentioned being catholic (I'm a protestant christian so I'm not knocking it) and how do you feel about those who have opted out of vaccinations due to the development of them using fetal cells from abortions?

[firsttimemama]

I've done a lot of reading re: vaccinations and my 14 mo old son is unvaxed, for now. I do not agree that everyone has the "same" risk of an adverse reaction from a vaccine. I have an extensive, huge history of autoimmune disease in my family. Does everyone have that? No.

[gatorsmom]

A significant percentage of women won't get immunity no matter how many rubella vaxes they receive. But if they had natural immunity from childhood (when Rubella is generally considered pretty mild), it wouldn't be an issue. So now we have the problem of my kids perhaps not being able to obtain natural immunity vs. moms without natural immunity relying on herd immunity from those who vaccinate.

Ask the parents who feel their children were vax damaged or peruse the VAERS database sometime (and know that even the FDA and CDC acknowledge that vaccine adverse event reporting is probably drastically under reported) how they feel. (eta: the estimates I've seen are 10% of adverse reactions are actually reported to VAERS) Who has more of a "right" to their beliefs and decisions?

I know we're not going to agree.


I don't know how to use the "several quotes" feature, but I do want to respond to a few things.

You said you wouldn't vaccinate your children in the event of an outbreak. I assume you mean you wouldn't vaccinate EVEN in the event of an outbreak. Why? If you don't vaccinate at all, I would assume that if there were cases of polio popping up in your neighborhood, you'd want to vaccinate against that.

I've never heard of women who can't get immunity to rubella through a vax. You said a significant percent- how much is that? 25% of the female populations? 10%? Is this something my ped should have warned me against when I had SiSi vaccinated?

As for the people who have been damaged by vaccinations, I agreed before, it's a risk. So is anesthesia in surgery. So is driving your car. But the risks from vaccinating are still few and the risk involved with NOT vaccinating is much, much greater. What would YOU do if everyone in your town took the stance YOU have? Would you move to a town where more people believe vaccinations are important?

To answer your last question, I think many of our countrymen have forgotten that we have a duty to each other. Not everyone can be a conscientous objector. Sometimes our beliefs and decisions have to take a backseat to what is best for everyone, not just what is best for ME.

You are right, we clearly won't agree on this.

[brittone2]

I keep wondering how you became so anti-vaccine.



Being surrounded by children with Autism in early intervention, preschools, and schools got me interested in the topic. While the parents of those children can't prove a causal link to vaccines, I've witnessed enough that started me down the road of questioning. That is my personal experience. There are people here with families that have experienced Polio, etc. and I don't discount their experiences.

I also am highly uncomfortable with the ethics at the FDA, CDC, etc. and their relationship to big pharma (with good reason). These organizations have created mistrust, skepticism, and cynicism in many parents through their own lack of ethical standards, and for that, they have themselves to blame.

eta:
mumps outbreak, 15 of 16 fully vaccinated:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/wales/north_west/7848857.stm

with respect to rubella, I've seen numbers that were quite high, but i don't want to misquote. Will look up more tomorrow. Really off to bed now ;)

and fwiw I live in a pocket where there is actually a relatively large non vaccinating population. I would not move to a different town if I lived in Boulder, Seattle, or areas where the rates of vaccination are probably even lower.

[m448]

I am one of the women who don't present immunity to rubella despite boosters (this was before having my first son). I also had a horrid reaction to the vaccination as a baby and didn't know about it until I was researching vaxes for my son and my mom mentioned it. The pedi tried to sell it to my mom as "oh my she JUST got the disease and what a wonderful thing that you had her vaccinated yesterday otherwise it would be so much worse." Ummm, yeah right.

Also I don't believe that the risks of vaccinations are simply the adverse effects to the vaccines. I believe that anything that taxes my kids' immune systems is detracting from said immune system's ability to fight off anything even a simple infection. So I boost their immune system with a decent diet, some supplements and the choice to NOT vaccinate.

[gatorsmom]

Lisa how comfortable do you feel knowing you are in contact with immunocompromised people and yet you and your children may be receiving live vaccines that shed and could expose those same people you are trying to protect?

Also you've mentioned being catholic (I'm a protestant christian so I'm not knocking it) and how do you feel about those who have opted out of vaccinations due to the development of them using fetal cells from abortions?

I'll answer your second question first- I had NO IDEA that aborted fetal cells were being used in vaccine development. Are you sure? Is this common practice by pharma companies? That makes me want to cry just hearing it. I'm absolutely prolife all across the board- pro-environment, pro-animal rights, anti-capital punishment, and absolutely anti-prochoice. If what you say is true, I need to start doing some research.

For your first question, I know that I may be shedding viruses from vaccines that I receive and yet when I weigh the pros and cons, I ALWAYS come out in favor of vaccinating. Each carries risks, however, there is greater risk involved with NOT vaccinating that WITH vaccinating. All you have to do is read a history book or talk to someone who lived prior to the 1940's and remembers the fear of catching polio or whooping cough.

ETA: what is that quote about being doomed to repeat history? scary.

[gatorsmom]

and fwiw I live in a pocket where there is actually a relatively large non vaccinating population. I would not move to a different town if I lived in Boulder, Seattle, or areas where the rates of vaccination are probably even lower.


Ok, you're off to bed, I should be going too. But if you are anything like the rest of us BBB junkies, you'll check these boards first thing in the morning, ;), so I wanted to ask you another question:

Since you seem to be someone who will do anything to protect her children and family and takes absolutely every proactive step possible to do that, how would you handle a situation where there was a polio outbreak in your neighborhood? If there is no herd immunity, it could wipe out so many children near you, and I'm sure you know, your children could be in real, serious danger. What would you do? I"m sure you have some sort of disaster plan in that case, right?

[jenny]

I don't understand the austim/vaccine debate when research keeps saying again and again that there is no causal link.

The Lancet article that first drew this attention has been discredited and their leading author chastized by the medical community for his dishonesty, no?

What do you guys think (pro vaccine and con vaccine parents alike) would be the worst case scenario if the trend towards not vaccinating children were to continue?

[sste]

Is anyone getting their vaccinated child titred (in other words, checking to make sure the vaccine "took"). I am planning to do this when my child enters public school - - despite the fact that is wasteful of our health care resources, I feel I have no choice.

We vaccinated fully except for rotavirus and I, like gatorsmom, would be pissed if my child became sick due to an unvaccinated child. If my child was disabled from it, pissed would not begin to capture how I would feel or the actions dh and I would pursue.

I very much anticipate that there is going to be growing litigation in this area. For example, MANY parents have lied/exaggerated to qualify for religious exemptions. Trust me when I tell you as a former lawyer that if herd immunity is compromised it won't be long before contingency-fee plaintiffs attorneys are leaping into the fray with claims against the non-vax parents for fraudulently obtaining the exemption, the school for negligently granting it without proper inquiry, etc. My legal prediction is also that in the next 10 years we are going to start seeing requirements of certain vaxes - - not all vaxes, but the most serious ones- - to attend public school with no exemptions. I don't think this will be found unconstitutional with respect to religion - - they will balance the interests of compromised herd immunity from let's say polio against the religious right at interest. I think an analogy would be if your religion mandated all followers carry a sharp instrument around that does not mean that a public school must let your child carry his sharp instrument - - the belief would be incompatible with public schooling and you would need to pursue other schooling options.

I like so many of you personally and see the strength of your beliefs - - but it is not fair to ask others to bear the costs of those beliefs when it comes to the serious diseases/vaxes. For me, the only sensible exemption for the purposes of admission to public school for a vaccine like the polio vaccine or other serious illnesss is for medically vulnerable children, family history issues, etc. If you feel strongly that your child should receive no vaccinations or should not receive the big-ticket vaccines, then I think part of the strength of your convictions is homeschooling your child or finding a religious school with likeminded, non-vaxing parents.

[lisams]

That's precisely why my children will not be going to school with unvaccinated children (if I have immuno-compromised people in my family).

I'm actually surprised the school would disclose information about the vaccination records of other students. I wonder if they're technically allowed to do that?

[gatorsmom]

I'm actually surprised the school would disclose information about the vaccination records of other students. I wonder if they're technically allowed to do that?

The teachers never named names or looked up files in front of me. They just said they didn't know of anyone off the top of their heads. But don't you think I have the right to know this in case I have a preemie at my home or am nursing a parent or relative of a serious illness that my kid might come home with a serious disease? I think I have the right to know that, even if I don't know WHO it is that is unvaccinated. And don't get me wrong, I DON"T think anyone should know names. But I at least have the right to know that the potential for harm is there.

[Georgia]

What do you guys think (pro vaccine and con vaccine parents alike) would be the worst case scenario if the trend towards not vaccinating children were to continue?

I think the tide is turning now and it's never going to get that far. There will always be a very small subset of people who object to vaccines because of their own religious/philosophical beliefs and who would not even get their children vaccinated in the event of a large outbreak. However, I think the smaller outbreaks happening now are starting to lead people who might have made this decision a bit more casually to reconsider. Doctors and scientists are also starting to speak out more strongly about vaccine safety and becoming more vocal about the lack of scientific support for an autism/vaccine link.

[lisams]

The teachers never named names or looked up files in front of me. They just said they didn't know of anyone off the top of their heads. But don't you think I have the right to know this in case I have a preemie at my home or am nursing a parent or relative of a serious illness that my kid might come home with a serious disease? I think I have the right to know that, even if I don't know WHO it is that is unvaccinated. And don't get me wrong, I DON"T think anyone should know names. But I at least have the right to know that the potential for harm is there.

I understand your concern, but I guess knowing that every child is immunized at my child's school wouldn't offer me, personally, a sense of protection. There's the grocery store, the park, the museum, the drs. office, anywhere we go where I would have no way of knowing who was immunized. And then there's the adults who haven't received their boosters.

At DD's school last year the K class had chicken pox go through the room. I overheard parents talking about it and several of them mentioned that their child had been vaccinated and had the booster.

I tend to worry more about the things I can control....a biggy for me personally was breastfeeding and making sure everyone who came into contact with the baby had washed their hands well. We're actually spreading out DS's vaccines partly because I personally believe they work better when the immune system isn't bombarded with tons of them at once. I have a profound respect for vaccines, just not the way they are given to infants (bundling 4-6 vaccines at one time).

[lisams]

Is anyone getting their vaccinated child titred (in other words, checking to make sure the vaccine "took"). I am planning to do this when my child enters public school - - despite the fact that is wasteful of our health care resources, I feel I have no choice.

We vaccinated fully except for rotavirus and I, like gatorsmom, would be pissed if my child became sick due to an unvaccinated child. If my child was disabled from it, pissed would not begin to capture how I would feel or the actions dh and I would pursue.

I very much anticipate that there is going to be growing litigation in this area. For example, MANY parents have lied/exaggerated to qualify for religious exemptions. Trust me when I tell you as a former lawyer that if herd immunity is compromised it won't be long before contingency-fee plaintiffs attorneys are leaping into the fray with claims against the non-vax parents for fraudulently obtaining the exemption, the school for negligently granting it without proper inquiry, etc. My legal prediction is also that in the next 10 years we are going to start seeing requirements of certain vaxes - - not all vaxes, but the most serious ones- - to attend public school with no exemptions. I don't think this will be found unconstitutional with respect to religion - - they will balance the interests of compromised herd immunity from let's say polio against the religious right at interest. I think an analogy would be if your religion mandated all followers carry a sharp instrument around that does not mean that a public school must let your child carry his sharp instrument - - the belief would be incompatible with public schooling and you would need to pursue other schooling options.

I like so many of you personally and see the strength of your beliefs - - but it is not fair to ask others to bear the costs of those beliefs when it comes to the serious diseases/vaxes. For me, the only sensible exemption for the purposes of admission to public school for a vaccine like the polio vaccine or other serious illnesss is for medically vulnerable children, family history issues, etc. If you feel strongly that your child should receive no vaccinations or should not receive the big-ticket vaccines, then I think part of the strength of your convictions is homeschooling your child or finding a religious school with likeminded, non-vaxing parents.

I'm curious why you chose not to vaccinate for rotavirus?

[TahliasMom]

having grown up in developing country, i have had every disease under the sun. my brother brought everything from preschool to the house as we were 4 years apart. i had chicken pox when i was under 1 year old, followed by mumps and rubella. i picked up the rest when i entered preschool. the only vac we had was small pox. others were available but scare and mostly available to elite. that's just how life was. my worst was measles that i got when i was 11 years old because i didn't have the vaccine. i ended up in the hospital with pneumonia and various complications. why in the world would i chose to put my child thru that?

i think developed countries are given too much choices and have too much time to think about such things as vac, pro life pro, choice while the rest of the world is just trying to survive. Have we forgotten the reason for them in the first place?

some people developed countries are so removed from it, it's hard for us to imagine the suffering and sometimes death the diseases cause to children.

yes my dd is vaccinated and i never had any second thoughts.

[maestramommy]

I'm curious why you chose not to vaccinate for rotavirus?

We didn't vax for rotavirus, because the vax is still very new, and we are suspicious of medicine that is too new. Also, because in the even t of rotovirus, living in this country, dire consequences are very rare. It's mostly a huge bummer. I do know people who got their second child vaxed (rototeq came after Dora) because their first child had it, and they just didn't want to go through it again. Dora did get it last year, and it was a mild bummer, but nothing like what I've heard. We just washed, washed, and washed our hands. Arwyn did not get it.

[maestramommy]

I'll answer your second question first- I had NO IDEA that aborted fetal cells were being used in vaccine development. Are you sure? Is this common practice by pharma companies? That makes me want to cry just hearing it. I'm absolutely prolife all across the board- pro-environment, pro-animal rights, anti-capital punishment, and absolutely anti-prochoice. If what you say is true, I need to start doing some research.



Lisa, I did read some documentation a while back that the original MMR vax was made using aborted fetus cells. There was some controversy over the reason for the abortion itself how that was done. But the documentation was sketchy and actually I had a lot of questions about it that were never answered.

[brittone2]

The teachers never named names or looked up files in front of me. They just said they didn't know of anyone off the top of their heads. But don't you think I have the right to know this in case I have a preemie at my home or am nursing a parent or relative of a serious illness that my kid might come home with a serious disease? I think I have the right to know that, even if I don't know WHO it is that is unvaccinated. And don't get me wrong, I DON"T think anyone should know names. But I at least have the right to know that the potential for harm is there.


Okay, so you know about the children in your child's school. Are your adult neighbors vaxed for pertussis? Adult aunts and uncles? Teachers? Babysitters? Pertussis has long been spread by adults or teens (teens prior to the new recommendation for pertussis booster). Most adults I know of are not up to date on their pertussis (perhaps some of the moms here, but we know the BBB doesn't represent the general public).

It isn't just about unvaxed children spreading it around.

[brittone2]

Lisa, I did read some documentation a while back that the original MMR vax was made using aborted fetus cells. There was some controversy over the reason for the abortion itself how that was done. But the documentation was sketchy and actually I had a lot of questions about it that were never answered.

I believe the vaxes are derived from fetal cell lines but don't technically contain them. I believe the Vatican says it is not a problem; however, there are parents who still believe that it is for their own personal religious convictions (some non-Catholics for example).

[brittone2]

I don't understand the austim/vaccine debate when research keeps saying again and again that there is no causal link.

The Lancet article that first drew this attention has been discredited and their leading author chastized by the medical community for his dishonesty, no?

What do you guys think (pro vaccine and con vaccine parents alike) would be the worst case scenario if the trend towards not vaccinating children were to continue?

Have you looked at some of the exclusion criteria?
For example:
Some studies exclude kids w/ a previous diagnosis of speech delay (which IME and the experience of most people who work in early intervention is how many or even most children later diagnosed w/ autism enter the system).
Some studies exclude PDD NOS (pervasive dev. disorder, part of the autistic spectrum). I worked in a preschool classroom of children on the spectrum, and 6 of the 8 had a dx of PDD NOS vs. autism.
Some studies only looked at children who were diagnosed by their primary care doc (something I personally have not come across nearly as often as children being diagnosed by a neuropsych or a behavioral pediatrician, for example).
The FDA and CDC haven't been the picture of good ethics. Look at their effort to move one of their research databases offshore so that the info couldn't be contained by a freedom of information act request (FOIA). Or the fact that Paul Offit, a vaccine patent holder and paid consultant to Merck continues to sit on the vaccine advisory board, where he gets to participate in what is put on the schedule. He was actually admonished by Congress IIRC for his ethics issues but he continues to hold his seat on the panel (or he did the last time I checked). Read some of the comments from Simpsonwood or the Puerto Rico conference on aluminum that were held. Those groups wanted to make their findings "go away" and said so.

Autism is what got me interested in the topic. I think there's a broader issue (w/ respect to autism) w/ environmental exposures in general (perhaps including autism).

For me, the concerns extend far beyond *just* autism.

[brittone2]

Is anyone getting their vaccinated child titred (in other words, checking to make sure the vaccine "took"). I am planning to do this when my child enters public school - - despite the fact that is wasteful of our health care resources, I feel I have no choice.

We vaccinated fully except for rotavirus and I, like gatorsmom, would be pissed if my child became sick due to an unvaccinated child. If my child was disabled from it, pissed would not begin to capture how I would feel or the actions dh and I would pursue.


I like so many of you personally and see the strength of your beliefs - - but it is not fair to ask others to bear the costs of those beliefs when it comes to the serious diseases/vaxes. For me, the only sensible exemption for the purposes of admission to public school for a vaccine like the polio vaccine or other serious illnesss is for medically vulnerable children, family history issues, etc. If you feel strongly that your child should receive no vaccinations or should not receive the big-ticket vaccines, then I think part of the strength of your convictions is homeschooling your child or finding a religious school with likeminded, non-vaxing parents.

Actually, I am homeschooling, but not for the reason you cited.

Good luck regulating the religious beliefs of others and determining what counts and doesn't. There is wording in some states under their religious exemptions that allow for a deeply held personal belief, "similar to a religious belief" for example. Not to mention that over 20 states allow for a philosophical exemption. I'm not so sure that these are being obtained fraudulently.

[brittone2]

I'm curious why you chose not to vaccinate for rotavirus?

I know intussusception is a concern for many parents w/ respect to rotovirus.

[brittone2]

To answer your last question, I think many of our countrymen have forgotten that we have a duty to each other. Not everyone can be a conscientous objector. Sometimes our beliefs and decisions have to take a backseat to what is best for everyone, not just what is best for ME.

You are right, we clearly won't agree on this.

I'm confused as to why if you felt the fetal cells used to develop certain vaxes could be a problem for you (or maybe not considering the Vatican has issued a statement about their thoughts on this). If it was a problem for you, I assume you would feel you should be able to exercise a religious exemption.

Should the same not be true for pacifists/conscientious objectors like the Quakers? Should their religion "count" when they refuse to serve in the military for exxample? What about other faiths which have a problem w/ vaccination? Who's views count? Why is it possibly a legitimate issue for you (or not, depending on what you find when you dig into it and decide for yourself) but other people can't hold a religious conviction about vaccination?

[crayonblue]

So much of our strong stances/beliefs stem from personal experience. I've got a child who will die within a year or two. You better believe that my children will get every vax availabe. Why? Because the small possibility of a reaction to a vax is a much better option than a disease that kills or disables. I'm living with that already.

I have a relative who isn't vaxing her children. She is anti everything so that doesn't surprise me. But, I feel very uncomfortable having my immuno-compromised child around her children. My child gets an illness, she dies now instead of perhaps a couple of years from now. I want that time with her.

[Ceepa]

So much of our strong stances/beliefs stem from personal experience. I've got a child who will die within a year or two. You better believe that my children will get every vax availabe. Why? Because the small possibility of a reaction to a vax is a much better option than a disease that kills or disables. I'm living with that already.

I have a relative who isn't vaxing her children. She is anti everything so that doesn't surprise me. But, I feel very uncomfortable having my immuno-compromised child around her children. My child gets an illness, she dies now instead of perhaps a couple of years from now. I want that time with her.

As always, Lana, (((HUGS))) to you and your little girl.

[fortato]

So much of our strong stances/beliefs stem from personal experience. I've got a child who will die within a year or two. You better believe that my children will get every vax availabe. Why? Because the small possibility of a reaction to a vax is a much better option than a disease that kills or disables. I'm living with that already.

I have a relative who isn't vaxing her children. She is anti everything so that doesn't surprise me. But, I feel very uncomfortable having my immuno-compromised child around her children. My child gets an illness, she dies now instead of perhaps a couple of years from now. I want that time with her.

And this is why Jack gets vaxed. I don't want my son to be the cause of anyone's loss, because it ultimately wouldn't be his fault...it would be mine.

Give Carmen a big hug from us Lana.

[Ceepa]

We choose to vaccinate for the health of our family; we don't do it primarily for the greater good of society, but increased protection for all certainly is a noble result from our decision and that of most parents.

[mommy111]

So much of our strong stances/beliefs stem from personal experience. I've got a child who will die within a year or two. You better believe that my children will get every vax availabe. Why? Because the small possibility of a reaction to a vax is a much better option than a disease that kills or disables. I'm living with that already.

I have a relative who isn't vaxing her children. She is anti everything so that doesn't surprise me. But, I feel very uncomfortable having my immuno-compromised child around her children. My child gets an illness, she dies now instead of perhaps a couple of years from now. I want that time with her.

Hugs to you, Carmen and Lauren, Lana.

[kijip]

I believe the vaxes are derived from fetal cell lines but don't technically contain them. I believe the Vatican says it is not a problem; however, there are parents who still believe that it is for their own personal religious convictions (some non-Catholics for example).


Not only does the vatican say it is not a problem, many Catholic schools are among the most restrictive on unvax-ed kids. In WA state we have personal, religious and medical vax exemptions for public school but there are a number of Catholic schools that choose to mandate vaccines for everyone (except medical exempted kids, of course) who wants to attend, period. No religious or personal exceptions allowed.

Seattle has a lower than normal overall vax rate and is located a short ferry ride from a small island community that has the highest rate of unvax-ed kids west of the Mississippi river as I understand it. While pregnant, I was specifically warned not to go there (which we had been planning to do for a B and B weekend). I know some younger adults about my age or a bit younger from this island who are have gone in to get various vaccines of their own decision and/or who are choosing to vaccinate their own children, for the very same reason my 60 odd year old father did- they lived with various diseases they personally prefer to spare their children from such as tetanus.

However, at least in Seattle area I know that the rate of families with exemptions is inflated higher than the actual rate of actually un-vaccinated kids. Why? Because signing the exemption form and turning that back in to school when they pester you for any missing vax records is easier for many families, especially if they move a lot, than running down the vax records, copying them and submitting them to the office. Unless there is a hoop for people to jump through (obtaining a separate, special form or submitting a letter you write or whatever) in other states with personal belief exemptions, I am sure this is true elsewhere.

[sste]

We didn't vax for rotavirus because our son is in an at-home care situation. That said, I think he just had it from someone in his music class and it was pure hell! So, next time around we may add that one . . .

[brittone2]

We didn't vax for rotavirus because our son is in an at-home care situation. That said, I think he just had it from someone in his music class and it was pure hell! So, next time around we may add that one . . .

Out of curiosity, then what of parents who have children not at high risk of Hib (since that's how this thread started)? Breastfed, not in daycare, not in an overcrowded home, not low income (all considered risk factors by the CDC). Is it okay for them to make a similar risk to benefit assessment?

eta: while rotavirus isn't often fatal here in the US, it can be. How about children abroad who may contract rotavirus from someone from the US in countries where IV fluids, etc. are not readily available (and therefore the risk of serious illness/death is higher in those countries). Do you have an ethical obligation to vax in that situation?

[egoldber]

We pretty much vax on schedule, but I declined rotavirus for Amy (wasn't available with Sarah) and declined Prevnar with Sarah when it was new. For rota I decided that the risks (intusseption, sp?) were not worth the benefit and 2) I am extremely leery of new *anything*. I don't buy a car in it's first model year and I don't use a vax in it's first year. There is a reason all pharmas are required to follow every drug for the first several years after release. There are *always* new issues that come to light when a drug is first placed on the market. Sometimes these issues are serious and sometimes not.

At her 2 month appointment, Amy received her vaxes even though she had a "slight cold". Runny nose, no fever, etc. In the next 48 hours she went from mildly sick to hospitalized with what turned out to be RSV. I will *always* believe that the vaxes were the last straw for her immune system and pushed her over the edge from making it a mild illness to one that needed hospitalization for 4 days. And that has made her more prone to respiratory infections.

I also know someone whose child was permanently damaged from a vaccine reaction. As in their child will spend the rest of their life in a full time care facility.

My dog died from autoimmune hemolytic anemia following getting a vax for Lyme disease, which was pulled off the market a few months later after MANY such cases were reported.

Vaxes can save lives. They can also hurt. Diseases can hurt, but they can also cause confer better immunity. These are hard choices and I don't think there is any one right answer.

[sste]

I wouldn't take my unvaxed son to those countries. If my son was in a setting with immunocompromised or ill children, I would vax him. If I was told there a significant risk that other children would die, I would vax him.

Our ped told us that rotavirus was not a personal or public health risk issue for an at-home care child, it was more a matter of convenience - - I haven't done that primary research to say whether this is right and I don't plan to, there are differences of opinion of course but our ped has not lead us astray in the past. DH and I have our own jobs, we don't want to become public health/peds experts researching this in our free time!

[maestramommy]

We pretty much vax on schedule, but I declined rotavirus for Amy (wasn't available with Sarah) and declined Prevnar with Sarah when it was new. For rota I decided that the risks (intusseption, sp?) were not worth the benefit and 2) I am extremely leery of new *anything*. I don't buy a car in it's first model year and I don't use a vax in it's first year. There is a reason all pharmas are required to follow every drug for the first several years after release. There are *always* new issues that come to light when a drug is first placed on the market. Sometimes these issues are serious and sometimes not..


Beth expresses our own beliefs here very well. Is Prevnar the one for cervical cancer? Or was it another one? That one was also too new and another I thought I'd pass on until MUCH later.

[egoldber]

Is Prevnar the one for cervical cancer?

No, Prevnar is for pneumococcal bacteria which can cause meningitis and also bacteremia. You're thinking of Gardisil, the new vax for HPV and cervical cancer. I am taking a wait and see on that one and thanking my stars I don't have a middle school aged girl right now.

[m448]

Lisa straight from the merck insert for the mmr vaccine:

http://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/m/mmr_ii/mmr_ii_pi.pdf

"live attenuated rubella virus propagated in WI-38 human diploid lung
fibroblasts"

Like Beth mentioned the vatican has released a statement basically saying it's not an issue but not being Roman Catholic it does not apply to me.

eta: I also wonder if the outrage would still be present in this thread if the headline read, "Child dies DUE to vaccine reaction." Yet those headlines aren't published are they? And if they were the parent's child would be considered a necessary casualty for the public health. All because vaccine companies and the government are covered from liability.

The developing country argument is strange at best. Do you not worry about the schooling choices for your daughter because someone in a developing country has no option for school? I come from another country that might have been considered developing, riddled with poverty, disease and a deep divide between the classes. Even to me it's apparent that vaccines in those instances are merely stop gaps for lack in infrastructure, access to clean water and food.

[lisams]

At her 2 month appointment, Amy received her vaxes even though she had a "slight cold". Runny nose, no fever, etc. In the next 48 hours she went from mildly sick to hospitalized with what turned out to be RSV. I will *always* believe that the vaxes were the last straw for her immune system and pushed her over the edge from making it a mild illness to one that needed hospitalization for 4 days. And that has made her more prone to respiratory infections.
.

Almost the exact same thing happened to DD after her 2 year vaccines. I remember when they were admitting her to the hospital (her oxygen level was 75%!) and they asked if she was up to date on her vaccines and I was like "Yes, she just had her most current round of vaccines 3 days ago" and then it hit me like a brick. OMG she just had her vaccines and now this child who has never had more than a runny nose is here being admitted to the hospital. After that the next two years every little runny nose meant possibly a trip to the hospital because her lungs were so damaged. I have no doubt that the vaccines wore her immune system down.

[Sillygirl]

eta: I also wonder if the outrage would still be present in this thread if the headline read, "Child dies DUE to vaccine reaction." Yet those headlines aren't published are they? And if they were the parent's child would be considered a necessary casualty for the public health. All because vaccine companies and the government are covered from liability.

Fire up Google and start looking for information on vaccines. You will find way more about autism and other adverse reactions than there is evidence to support them. That's why I post these stories, because I think parents get a very skewed picture.

Same thing with the language people use: "overwhelming" and "bombarding" the immune system. It's very graphic and scary sounding, isn't it? Using language like that shapes the decision making process. Think about a vaccine as "introducing your child's immune system to the germ, as a learning experience in a controlled fashion." Language makes a lot of difference.

I know I'm never changing some people's minds, and that isn't my goal. I just think there's too much out there from the anti-vax folks, and it's time to start presenting the other viewpoint.

[wellyes]

Fire up Google and start looking for information on vaccines. You will find way more about autism and other adverse reactions than there is evidence to support them. That's why I post these stories, because I think parents get a very skewed picture.

I agree with this. Thanks for posting the story.

[SnuggleBuggles]

Fire up Google and start looking for information on vaccines. You will find way more about autism and other adverse reactions than there is evidence to support them. That's why I post these stories, because I think parents get a very skewed picture.


Are people who choose not to vax (or delay. select...) posting stories as often as you are about their side of things? I am all for balance but I think that things aren't totally balanced wrt this discussion lately.

Beth

[m448]

See aside from death and the autism discussion I'm also thinking of real quantifiable adverse effects that I see people brushing off as easily as us non-vaxers are accused of brushing off the risks of certain diseases. Things like a severe fever, hospitalization, severe case of the disease itself despite vaccination. I see many people who willingly inject in their children more chemicals then they were willing to inject in the animals they EAT for goodness sake.

Beth and Lisa both have posted how their daughters were hospitalized quite possibly due to the effect of vaccines on their immune system. Did anyone get ticked off and suggest to them that they should sue their doctors, the pharma companies or the CDC to cover costs of the hospitalization? No. Yet the other day when the case of the child returning from switzerland and spreading measles came up someone suggested that they would absolutely sue for damages and hospitalization costs if an unvaxed child were to DARE infect their child with a disease.

[sste]

I believe there is a national vaccine compensation fund. There is no such fund for children who are infected and injured by unvaxed children. That is part of the reason I foresee private litigation in the future.

If you choose not to vax for personal reasons (rather than family history, medically vulnerable child) then I am puzzled as to why a non-vaxing parent shouldn't have to assume responsibility if serious harm, injury, or death to another child is caused by their decision not to vaccinate . . .

[gatorsmom]

Okay, so you know about the children in your child's school. Are your adult neighbors vaxed for pertussis? Adult aunts and uncles? Teachers? Babysitters? Pertussis has long been spread by adults or teens (teens prior to the new recommendation for pertussis booster). Most adults I know of are not up to date on their pertussis (perhaps some of the moms here, but we know the BBB doesn't represent the general public).

It isn't just about unvaxed children spreading it around.

That's absolutely true. I can't control everything. Asking the teachers if everyone is vaxed is something I can do. Surrounding my children with other children who are vaxed is something I can do.

[m448]

I believe there is a national vaccine compensation fund. There is no such fund for children who are infected and injured by unvaxed children. That is part of the reason I foresee private litigation in the future.

If you choose not to vax for personal reasons (rather than family history, medically vulnerable child) then I am puzzled as to why a non-vaxing parent shouldn't have to assume responsibility if serious harm, injury, or death to another child is caused by their decision not to vaccinate . . .

Ahhh, but the pharmaceutical company has done their part with the disclaimer so if an adverse reaction happens are they going to going to pay for a child's hospitalization? How easy do you think it will be for a parent to be compensated for that from the fund?

And if we're going to be all about the personal responsibility let's take it a bit further. If YOUR child who received a live vaccine infects a non vaxed child will it be okay to sue YOU for damages? Let's ignore the fact that in this very provaccine culture it's almost impossible to get a doc to diagnose VPDs as such in a vaccinated child and let's ignore the fact that health departments and even the CDC are very reluctant to admit that an outbreak could have been possible due to live vaccines and NOT unvaxed people. For the record I would not sue because that scenario was one I considered when making the choice to not vaccinate my children.

[JamiMac]

We pretty much vax on schedule, but I declined rotavirus for Amy (wasn't available with Sarah) and declined Prevnar with Sarah when it was new. For rota I decided that the risks (intusseption, sp?) were not worth the benefit and 2) I am extremely leery of new *anything*. I don't buy a car in it's first model year and I don't use a vax in it's first year. There is a reason all pharmas are required to follow every drug for the first several years after release. There are *always* new issues that come to light when a drug is first placed on the market. Sometimes these issues are serious and sometimes not.

At her 2 month appointment, Amy received her vaxes even though she had a "slight cold". Runny nose, no fever, etc. In the next 48 hours she went from mildly sick to hospitalized with what turned out to be RSV. I will *always* believe that the vaxes were the last straw for her immune system and pushed her over the edge from making it a mild illness to one that needed hospitalization for 4 days. And that has made her more prone to respiratory infections.

I also know someone whose child was permanently damaged from a vaccine reaction. As in their child will spend the rest of their life in a full time care facility.

My dog died from autoimmune hemolytic anemia following getting a vax for Lyme disease, which was pulled off the market a few months later after MANY such cases were reported.

Vaxes can save lives. They can also hurt. Diseases can hurt, but they can also cause confer better immunity. These are hard choices and I don't think there is any one right answer.

My now 7 year old went from having a slight runny nose to having full blown RSV the next day and admitted into the hospital that night. This was not anywhere near when she had her vaccines. I think it is just the nature of RSV to sometimes be sudden and severe. Not to say that yours wasn't connected to the vaccine, we just had a similar situation and it was not connected. She did go on to have respiratory problems and pneumonia the next couple of years but it seems fine now.

[KBecks]

I believe there is a national vaccine compensation fund. There is no such fund for children who are infected and injured by unvaxed children. That is part of the reason I foresee private litigation in the future.

If you choose not to vax for personal reasons (rather than family history, medically vulnerable child) then I am puzzled as to why a non-vaxing parent shouldn't have to assume responsibility if serious harm, injury, or death to another child is caused by their decision not to vaccinate . . .


Children are not injured by unvaxed children. People can be injured by the bacteria and viruses, which are a part of nature.

[lisams]

I believe there is a national vaccine compensation fund. There is no such fund for children who are infected and injured by unvaxed children. .


Tell that to a parent that has lost their child due to a vaccine. All the money in the world can't bring that life back. There is no compensation great enough when a child has been killed or seriously harmed.

[Corie]

I know I'm never changing some people's minds, and that isn't my goal. I just think there's too much out there from the anti-vax folks, and it's time to start presenting the other viewpoint.


I agree! It's nice to see the other side every once in awhile. :)

My kids are vaxed on schedule and their shots are completely up-to-date.

[lisams]

Think about a vaccine as "introducing your child's immune system to the germ, as a learning experience in a controlled fashion." Language makes a lot of difference.
.

Well, if you want to talk about language, it would be more like: "introducing your child's (2 month old) immune system to Haemophilus Influenzae Type B (HIB), Pneumococcal, Diphtheria, Tetanus, Pertussis, Polio and Rotavirus (5 strains)."

I think that's a little bit different than "introducing your child's immune system to the germ"

But that's just my personal opinion. I would be turned off by a dr. who put it the simplistic way, because I would feel like he was not being completely honest and trying to mislead me into making a not fully educated decision.

[sste]

A few points of clarification:

1. Regarding, "Ahh, but of course the pharma companies have disclaimers and other protections" the compensation fund is federally run and administered - - the government pays out. Federal compensation funds normally do not depend on private companies for decisionmaking; they are considered a public alternative to litigation.

2. To the person who noted that no money can bring back a dead child, I agree with that certainly. However, that reasoning gets to the heart of the original post - - no amount of money can bring back a child who dies from a vaccine-preventable disease because of a decision NOT to vaccinate. Ultimately we have to look at total deaths/injuries/monetary resources expended for x vax versus not using x vax and figure out which causes the LEAST damage.

3. Kbecks, normally I agree with you, but to say that children don't give other children diseases but bacteria and viruses do and they are a part of nature so that is somehow different (??) is puzzling to me. This is like saying drunk drivers don't kill and injure people, their cars do. Or the laws of physics do. Another analogy is if a person with HIV has unprotected sex - - it is fair to say he DIDN'T injure his partner, the virus did! Semantics aside, people are still injured or dead.

4. I know nothing about live vaccine transmission and can't speak credibly to that issue. I have never read about a live vaccine outbreak but my field is not public health.

My central point is this: You may not personally like a future of litigation but my take is that it will almost certainly come to pass if the decision to vaccinate against serious diseases remains unregulated and if herd immunity is compromised. This will happen for a variety of reasons. You may think now you would never sue but what about when you are about to lose your home to medical bills? When your child can't get a certain treatment because you can't pay for it? When your out of pocket health expenditures are depleting your retirement savings? Or when your child is dead and you feel that that the public import of that death has not been recognized?

[m448]

I am aware of the funding for the vaccine injury fund. However the decision making by federal agencies has been severely on the provaccine side. So much so that for any decision to pay for a vaccine related agency you can bet there are hundreds more that were explained away much like the deaths related to gardasil. Since when do perfectly healthy tweens die unexpectedly from pulmonary embolisms and it not be related to a recent vaccination?

My point is that pharma companies have washed their handds of responsibility while the government sets up a fund that is held tightly by agencies employing people with ties to those same pharmaceutical companies, being wined & dined by those companies and lobbied to death.

I foresee a different future than what you've proposed. I see a future where people will see a rise in infertility and the government won't be able to explain it away. More people with immune related diseases such as lupus, MS, etc. More people will wake up to the harm that vaccines can cause and whether the CDC, much like the FDA lately has truly been a champion for the public good or is holding the public hostage to their preferred policies. The question is will it be too late when people wake up and smell the coffee?

[sste]

I take it you are aware of the facts, but the fund is collected by imposing a flat excise tax on each vaccine imposesd on the sale of the vaccine. An individual pharma company is not going to have the incentives to police any particular compensation decision since everyone is paying all the time, no matter what. Indeed, if the pharma companies pay less into the fund via that excise tax, that means its because they are selling fewer vaccines, a result they presumably do not want!! The companies may have incentives to lobby over the excise tax amount (and the compensation amounts) but not any particular compensation decision. I say "may" because pharmas are often monopolists due to their patents so they are frequently going to pass these costs onto consumers without business repercussions to themselves - - it then becomes a social insurance fund, which I think is what it should be.

We can certainly argue about the amount of compensation and the fact that deaths are incommensurable but I don't think it advances our discussion to make claims about back pockets and dinners and agency corruption without looking carefully at the structure of the program.

[JamiMac]

I am aware of the funding for the vaccine injury fund. However the decision making by federal agencies has been severely on the provaccine side. So much so that for any decision to pay for a vaccine related agency you can bet there are hundreds more that were explained away much like the deaths related to gardasil. Since when do perfectly healthy tweens die unexpectedly from pulmonary embolisms and it not be related to a recent vaccination?

My point is that pharma companies have washed their handds of responsibility while the government sets up a fund that is held tightly by agencies employing people with ties to those same pharmaceutical companies, being wined & dined by those companies and lobbied to death.

I foresee a different future than what you've proposed. I see a future where people will see a rise in infertility and the government won't be able to explain it away. More people with immune related diseases such as lupus, MS, etc. More people will wake up to the harm that vaccines can cause and whether the CDC, much like the FDA lately has truly been a champion for the public good or is holding the public hostage to their preferred policies. The question is will it be too late when people wake up and smell the coffee?


The days of wining and dining in the pharmaceutical industry are for the most part long-gone and have been for quite some time.

[m448]

really? Because I'd love to know how a company manages to put out a rotavirus vaccine that causes something as serious as intersucception in infants. Obviously that one was rushed through. How about the fact that gardasil is being tested on the population right now. Who's pockets were lined to get that pushed through? I'm not talking of the wining and dining that happened among the drug rep ranks but the upper echelon of the pharma companies in conjunction with those at the CDC.

I'm not blind to the inner workings of big pharma. I used to work in a sector of it long enough to know that the findings of studies are definitely reworked to the benefit of those paying for said studies.

[kusumat]

The part that I don't understand is why unvax pp try to promote their belief or convince others that vaccination is bad. Do they want the remaining of the community to be unvaxed too?

What if more than 80% of children were unvaxed and there were outbreaks? It is true that those disease can be cured or managed by our medical advancement; However, if there are so many sick children, some of them may not be as lucky as others.

I think a lot of pp still believe in the benefits of vaccination. So, we take some risk to vaccinate our children. Unvax pp do not want to take any risks and have got benefit from the herd community immunity. So, why do they want to break it??

[m448]

I don't see non vaxers pushing their beliefs on others. What I see is a dangerous mindset from some on this thread and in the general populace that non vaxers are dangerous and that somehow our beliefs need to be trumped for the public good. That somehow mandating vaccines despite differing religious beliefs would be an end that justified the means. That these non compliant people need to be coerced into compliance.

In fact as a non vaxer I've seen on this board a constant tearing down of any belief a non vaxer may have as a reason for not vaccinating their children instead of a respect of said belief. Whether scientific, religious or philosophical. As far as herd immunity, I don't believe in it. I don't believe that vaccinations work as effectively as they should, thus others choosing to vax or not vax is not something I weighed in my decision.

[o_mom]

The part that I don't understand is why unvax pp try to promote their belief or convince others that vaccination is bad. Do they want the remaining of the community to be unvaxed too?

What if more than 80% of children were unvaxed and there were outbreaks? It is true that those disease can be cured or managed by our medical advancement; However, if there are so many sick children, some of them may not be as lucky as others.

I think a lot of pp still believe in the benefits of vaccination. So, we take some risk to vaccinate our children. Unvax pp do not want to take any risks and have got benefit from the herd community immunity. So, why do they want to break it??


When I read these threads, and similar ones on other boards, it seems like there are two 'camps' around the non-pro-vax position. I put it that way for a reason.

The first camp tends to be the all out anti-vax set. Some feel that vaccines don't work or that they are not worth the risk/benefit in any case. Those are the ones that feel nobody should vaccinate. I rarely see postings of this position on this board (MDC is another story :))

The second camp is a wide group who feels that everyone should have the right to choose for themselves to vaccinate or not. Many in this second group vaccinate their own children, either partially, fully or delayed, but they don't feel that they can force this on everyone. Some have concerns over the testing and approval of vaccines, some feel that for relatively mild diseases such as Rotavirus, there is no pressing public health need to mandate it. Some also feel that mandating vaccination without a clear public health need and a clear risk/benefit is a very slippery slope to requiring other medical treatments. <I'm just stating how I read the opinions that others have written, not stating my own>

I don't think anyone here, at least on this thread that I can recall, has said that nobody should vaccinate, that vaccines (in general) don't work. I can't find a post that says anything about people who want to vaccinate not being allowed to. What I have seen is people advocating for the option to choose not to and why they feel that vaccination is the the right choice for their children.

FTR: I am not anti-vax. My kids are vaccinated according to a schedule we decided on with our physician and will meet the requirements for school entry. However, I fully support the right of every parent to decide what is best for their child.

[Ceepa]

The part that I don't understand is why unvax pp try to promote their belief or convince others that vaccination is bad. Do they want the remaining of the community to be unvaxed too?

What if more than 80% of children were unvaxed and there were outbreaks? It is true that those disease can be cured or managed by our medical advancement; However, if there are so many sick children, some of them may not be as lucky as others.

I think a lot of pp still believe in the benefits of vaccination. So, we take some risk to vaccinate our children. Unvax pp do not want to take any risks and have got benefit from the herd community immunity. So, why do they want to break it??

Actually I think that people who do not vax are just fine with those who do because the latter create a safer environment for the former's unvaccinated kids. JMHO. They disagree with the decision to vaccinate their own children.

[DrSally]

I'm reading this thread thinking about my daughter's upcoming 6 month appt. It all becomes less abstract when you are talking about a specific child. Let me preface by saying I'm generally "pro-vax", but do believe vaccine injuries are real and happen. DS was vaccinated on schedule, no problems.

DD was 4 weeks early and given the full complement of vaccines at 8 weeks old. She fell asleep in the carseat on the way home, and when she woke up 2 hours later, she was screaming the most disturbing scream, nonstop for 3 hours. It was something I had never heard from her, and sounded like a wounded animal. She refused to eat, which she never does, had a fever of 100.3, and some wheezing. I called the dr. office and the nurse brushed it off, saying a fever of 105 after vaccines was "normal". I gave her some tylenol and she took a long nap and then was back to normal. I'm not sure if it was the fever that was bothering her or something else, but it was scary. Since the dr's office wasn't much help, I emailed Dr. Bob Sears, who was very helpful. He thought it might be "overload" from so many shots at once and suggested his alternate schedule.

My ped was quite annoyed by this, saying she thought Dr. Bob was giving unfounded advice to make a boatload of money, but did admit it was an adverse reaction and agreed to the alternate schedule. She even reported it to Vaers. DD did fine with DPat and Rota. Then, a month later, I did HIB, Prevnar and polio.

Again, she fell asleep on the way home and woke up screaming bloody murder, a totally disturbing pain cry, nonstop for an hour and a half. I could only calm her by holding her skin to skin and rocking her until she fell asleep eventually. When she woke up, it was the same cry. Her fever started at 99.8 and peaked that night at 102.7. SHE DIDN'T TALK, SMILE, OR LAUGH for 24 HOURS. Needless to say, I was very worried. After exactly 24 hours she was back to herself. Again, I don't know if it was the fever or something else at work. But, I was/am scared s@#tless.

I don't know what to do. I will give the Dtap and rota again since those were tolerated well together. Thinking of proceeding very cautiously and giving only 1 vax per time. That means a lot of trips to the dr., but I can handle that. I'm wondering though, if I proceed and the next reaction is even worse, how will I live with myself?

[TahliasMom]

Actually I think that people who do not vax are just fine with those who do because the latter create a safer environment for the former's unvaccinated kids. JMHO. They disagree with the decision to vaccinate their own children.


i totally agree with the above...

[m448]

DrSally it definitely is a scary place to be. My oldest was vaccinated until he was 9 months old. I suspect certain things but we'll never know.

I disagree that those who don't vax wish for those who do to continue for our benefit. I'd love to see more parents stand up to the CDC and those companies producing vaxes by refusing to inject the current cocktail until vaccinations are deemed more safe than risky. Why do we encourage people to let their dollar do the talking yet we continue to patronize an industry that hasn't proven to have our children's best inerest at heart?

Also I realize that vaccinations have effects upon generations. I have two boys and one day they are likely to grow up and get married to two women who could have likely been fully vaccinated as children. That can play a role in their fertility as a couple as well as the way their genes are passed onto my future grandchildren. Despite not currently vaccinating my children I was fully vaccinated, had a severe reaction and even still had a pretty serious round of vaxes before my first pregnancy.

[firsttimemama]

Have you looked at some of the exclusion criteria?
For example:
Some studies exclude kids w/ a previous diagnosis of speech delay (which IME and the experience of most people who work in early intervention is how many or even most children later diagnosed w/ autism enter the system).
Some studies exclude PDD NOS (pervasive dev. disorder, part of the autistic spectrum). I worked in a preschool classroom of children on the spectrum, and 6 of the 8 had a dx of PDD NOS vs. autism.
Some studies only looked at children who were diagnosed by their primary care doc (something I personally have not come across nearly as often as children being diagnosed by a neuropsych or a behavioral pediatrician, for example).
The FDA and CDC haven't been the picture of good ethics. Look at their effort to move one of their research databases offshore so that the info couldn't be contained by a freedom of information act request (FOIA). Or the fact that Paul Offit, a vaccine patent holder and paid consultant to Merck continues to sit on the vaccine advisory board, where he gets to participate in what is put on the schedule. He was actually admonished by Congress IIRC for his ethics issues but he continues to hold his seat on the panel (or he did the last time I checked). Read some of the comments from Simpsonwood or the Puerto Rico conference on aluminum that were held. Those groups wanted to make their findings "go away" and said so.

Autism is what got me interested in the topic. I think there's a broader issue (w/ respect to autism) w/ environmental exposures in general (perhaps including autism).

For me, the concerns extend far beyond *just* autism.

I agree with everything said here - especially Offit and that this is not just about autism.

[brittone2]

If only it was so simple that those who have concerns about the FDA, CDC, the schedule, etc. were just crazy, unscientific, alarmist extremist parents.
===============================================
From:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/05/12/cbsnews_investigates/main4086809.shtml


" I think that the public health officials have been too quick to dismiss the hypothesis as irrational," Healy said.

"But public health officials have been saying they know, they've been implying to the public there's enough evidence and they know it's not causal," Attkisson said.

"I think you can't say that," Healy said. "You can't say that."

Healy goes on to say public health officials have intentionally avoided researching whether subsets of children are “susceptible” to vaccine side effects - afraid the answer will scare the public.

"You're saying that public health officials have turned their back on a viable area of research largely because they're afraid of what might be found?" Attkisson asked.

Healy said: "There is a completely expressed concern that they don't want to pursue a hypothesis because that hypothesis could be damaging to the public health community at large by scaring people. "First of all," Healy said, "I think the public’s smarter than that. The public values vaccines. But more importantly, I don’t think you should ever turn your back on any scientific hypothesis because you’re afraid of what it might show."

If your child was vax injured, how would that make you feel? Would you feel like the CDC and FDA were working hard on your family's behalf to uncover what *might* have contributed to your child's issues?

She is one person. But she was brave enough to speak out. I think many more know what she says is the truth but haven't been able to speak out or blow the whistle (yet).

edited to fix format

[Ceepa]

She is one person. But she was brave enough to speak out. I think many more know what she says is the truth but haven't been able to speak out or blow the whistle (yet).

Let's just say people may not know everything they think they do about Healy's motivations.

[brittone2]

Offit and his conflicts of interest (which he rarely fully discloses when giving interviews, etc.)
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/07/25/cbsnews_investigates/main4296175.shtml

medical ghostwriting (how much honesty are we getting, particularly in a post Vioxx, etc. era when we should be demanding more info, more disclosure)

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/13/business/13wyeth.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/wales/north_west/7848857.stm

Another piece by B. Healy:
http://health.usnews.com/articles/health/brain-and-behavior/2008/04/10/fighting-the-autism-vaccine-war.html

[brittone2]

Let's just say people may not know everything they think they do about Healy's motivations.

Well, it backs up other info that has been out there.

[mytwosons]

DrSally - :hug5: I really feel for you. If you do decide to give more shots, I would recommend giving motrin instead of tylenol. I've read some things that tylenol depletes gluthione (sp?) which can make things worse.

Now, my general response: I haven't yet jumped into this thread because it's just to close. However, I feel like I need to say something. It seems to me that many people feel the only people that should be exempt from vaccines are those with weakened immune systems and other medical reasons. The problem I see with that is no one tests the immune system before giving the shots! My ASD child has an autoimmune disease, but we didn't know at the time of his vaxes. I don't know if the vaxes harmed him, but my point is, by Pharma standards, he shouldn't have received the shots but did, because no one tested him for immune issues.

[gatorsmom]

I'm confused as to why if you felt the fetal cells used to develop certain vaxes could be a problem for you (or maybe not considering the Vatican has issued a statement about their thoughts on this). If it was a problem for you, I assume you would feel you should be able to exercise a religious exemption.

Should the same not be true for pacifists/conscientious objectors like the Quakers? Should their religion "count" when they refuse to serve in the military for exxample? What about other faiths which have a problem w/ vaccination? Who's views count? Why is it possibly a legitimate issue for you (or not, depending on what you find when you dig into it and decide for yourself) but other people can't hold a religious conviction about vaccination?


i NEVER said what actions I would take if it was found that fetal cells from dead babies were used to develop vaxes. So, you assumed incorrectly that I feel I'm above others.

If I found out that fetal cells were used, I"d search for an alternative vaccine NOT developed this way. I want my children vaccinated for all the reasons I stated above.

But, Brittone, you still haven't answered my previous question: I've found that you are much more prepared and well read that many of the other posters here (including me). What plan do you have in place if polio (or HIb, measles, etc.,) starts infecting people in your community? Have you checked to see if your community has the resources and plans in place to deal with such an event?

[squimp]

If only it was so simple that those who have concerns about the FDA, CDC, the schedule, etc. were just crazy, unscientific, alarmist extremist parents.
===============================================
From:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/05/12/cbsnews_investigates/main4086809.shtml

Sounds like she's calling for more work to be done. I have a problem with the article though. They state that the vaccine was "Their only known exposure (to mercury)." But mercury enters the human body via many sources, including diet and environment. The amount of mercury in even an adult shot is equivalent to that found in one can of tuna. And I haven't seen a huge outcry against the fishing industry. It's in arguably a less dangerous form in the shot (thimerosal) than in fish (methymercury).

The story you linked to makes a great anecdote. I just think there needs to be more science! It is extremely difficult to demonstrate human effects on global warming, but we have a scientific consensus on that issue. And yet we do not, on arguably an even more important component of our future - our children! I am also concerned about the link to autism and other illnesses and problems. We need quality science from concerned professionals to demonstrate these links. Without that it is going to be hard to convince people broadly of the risks. I read pages and pages of vaccine stuff on mothering dot com last night, and saw lots of people who are convinced, angry, snide, etc., but very few who are convincing. Saying that the FDA and the CDC are biased is really not going to cut it! I hope that some of the new MDs and PhDs will take these questions on and have the intellectual freedom to address them.

[MommytoEliana]

My DH has a prominent scar on his throat from the emergency tracheotomy that saved his life when he developed acute epiglottitis (one of the many things that can result from HiB) at age four. He was the first child in his city (in 1976) to make it to the hospital in time to save his life.

Needless to say, our children have been vaccinated. :-)

[Sillygirl]

We need quality science from concerned professionals to demonstrate these links. Without that it is going to be hard to convince people broadly of the risks. I read pages and pages of vaccine stuff on mothering dot com last night, and saw lots of people who are convinced, angry, snide, etc., but very few who are convincing. Saying that the FDA and the CDC are biased is really not going to cut it! I hope that some of the new MDs and PhDs will take these questions on and have the intellectual freedom to address them.

Quality science comes at a price. There have been numerous epidemiologic studies over the past few years - none show a link between vaccines and autism. They are not top-quality, placebo controlled double blind trials. Why not? Because those studies would cost tens of millions of dollars and injecting kids with placebo vaccines is unethical.

Research dollars are ever scarcer. Money put into yet another study looking for a link between vaccines and x disease is money that is not spent in looking for effective treatments.

[mamicka]

It's always tragic when this happens.

I wish, however, that there could be more respect to go around regarding people's parenting/vax choices. I'm not anti-vax. My children have been vaccinated although we follow our own dr-approved schedule. My father is a pediatrician in his 70's who was raised in 3rd-world conditions without most vaxes. I've read plenty of info both pro & con for vaxes in general & specific vaxes. Our family has not made our vax choices lightly. While I know plenty of people who have not, IMO, given this topic enough thought - they fall equally into the pro-vax & anti-vax camps. I just wish that people understood - especially people on this board - that everybody who fully educates him/herself about the issue will not come to the same conclusion. It is still my right to vax or not to vax my children & it seems that many people here think it shouldn't be. That scares me.

[maestramommy]

It's always tragic when this happens.

I wish, however, that there could be more respect to go around regarding people's parenting/vax choices. I'm not anti-vax. My children have been vaccinated although we follow our own dr-approved schedule. My father is a pediatrician in his 70's who was raised in 3rd-world conditions without most vaxes. I've read plenty of info both pro & con for vaxes in general & specific vaxes. Our family has not made our vax choices lightly. While I know plenty of people who have not, IMO, given this topic enough thought - they fall equally into the pro-vax & anti-vax camps. I just wish that people understood - especially people on this board - that everybody who fully educates him/herself about the issue will not come to the same conclusion. It is still my right to vax or not to vax my children & it seems that many people here think it shouldn't be. That scares me.

That was very well said!

[brittone2]

Gatorsmom-
sorry for phrasing things the way I did. I interpreted what you said as meaning you *might* have a problem w/ the use of cell lines derived from aborted fetal cells. I was in a haste to get out the door this morning for a doc appt and didn't phrase that in the best way possible.

As far as Polio, I'm quite comfortable with my own research on the topic, and I answered early in this thread that I would still not vax due to my religious convictions. I don't know what else you want me to say? I've been interested in this topic for a good 5 years now. I'm admittedly not as up to date on things as I was at one time, but I feel comfortable that I've done my homework. At the end of the day, that's all most of us can do.

My biggest concerns are that the FDA, CDC, etc. continue to IMO create their own problems and generate distrust in the public through their ethics issues and through many of their other actions. I don't think that helps many pro or non vaxing parents feel particularly confident that their children's interests are being served as well as they could.

Continuing to add more and more vaxes to the schedule makes many provax parents eventually scratch their head and wonder where it ends and how much is too much.

[firsttimemama]

Actually I think that people who do not vax are just fine with those who do because the latter create a safer environment for the former's unvaccinated kids. JMHO. They disagree with the decision to vaccinate their own children.

Why would you presume to know how a nonvaxer thinks or what they think if you are pro-vax?

[niccig]

It's such a complicated issue. I understand the reasons why people do or do not vaccinate. You have to weigh up the pros/cons and decide what works for you as a family, and which risks you are willing to take - and both sides have risks. As Tahlia's Mum, Beth and others have already said, your personal experience has much influence.

I did want to ask those that don't vax, if they're trying to give their children natural immunity, so they get the disease as a child rather than as an adult. My father had measles, mumps and chickenpox as an adult, as his mother kept him away from other kids when those diseases were going around. He was hospitalized with mumps and the measles and chicken pox were more serious for him than for my sisters and I. And it was a PITA for my mother as she had 4 sick kids instead of 3 and of course Dad was more difficult than we were.

Do areas with larger numbers of unvax. children still have for example chicken pox parties to give their kids natural exposure? It seems you could be stuck - you don't vax, but as there are less cases of these diseases, you're kids may not get natural exposure when young like many of us did.

I also wonder if anyone that doesn't vax, do they worry about any travel? I know not everyone travels internationally like our family does thanks to family on 3 continents, but is this something you factor in? I've had lots of vaccinations because of travel - I did not want to get Yellow Fever - and I had to have proof of vaccinations to get a Green Card. That one amused me, I had already been in the country for 2 years and now they wanted to know that vaccinations up to date, no exposure to TB, and no diseases like AIDS.

[Ceepa]

Why would you presume to know how a nonvaxer thinks or what they think if you are pro-vax?

I thought my "JMHO" made it clear that this is my personal opinion. That's all it is.

[brittone2]

Adding this to the mix. I think saying that it is all a settled deal is misleading. We are still learning about epigenetics, broader environmental exposure, (maybe or maybe not including vaccines in that exposure), etc

http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/Jan09/prenatalToxicity.sl.html

in an invited, peer-reviewed journal article on how prenatal exposure to toxic substances are linked to a host of diseases in later life -- from atherosclerosis to cancer -- a Cornell toxicologist calls for changing how safety testing is done to better protect infants and children.

<snip>
Yet, many chronic diseases that have been increasing in incidence -- including childhood asthma and allergies, autism, childhood leukemia, type 1 diabetes, celiac disease, rheumatoid arthritis and lupus -- are associated with early life environmental exposures, and they all also have immune dysfunction in common."

Dietert, who has been studying for more than a decade how toxic substances affect the developing immune system, stresses the need to focus more attention on identifying environmental factors that can damage the immune system during prenatal, infant and juvenile development. Protecting the immature immune systems could not only extend quality of life during adulthood, but also reduce future health care needs.

eta: this link as well
http://pubs.acs.org/stoken/presspac/presspac/full/10.1021/tx800198m?cookieSet=1

[Jeanne]

Immunity is a luck-of-the-draw thing to me. We have been blessed with good genetics in that no one on either side of the family is compromised or prone to illness. I have had some stress related auto immune things pop up but they are only annoying and not life compromising. Of course the docs can never really say they are due to stress but they always occur in times of great stress so therefore, I deduce… But it is true that testing on the immune system isn't done so therefore, what can really be known about risk at such an early age? And Auto Immune disorders are so complicated.

We did vax on schedule with great reservation as my cousin was diagnosed with classic Autism. His mother reassured me that she had no reservations about his vaxing. She could see problems at 12 months. But I was still terrified as something is triggering this and it's just not well understood. Another cousin died from a strain of Strep that no vax can protect against. That being said, I had a Great Aunt with Polio. She contracted it at age 2 and spent her life disabled. The decision to vax against something like that was far more beneficial to me than risky.

I am a fanatical hand washer. I do believe in exposure at low viral count loads as it does in fact help boost immunity in healthy people. Having my girls in schools with good hand washing habits does deliver low exposures with rare full blown illness. When the stomach bug is going around, I start pumping our stomachs with Acidophilus caplets. The girls run screaming but I know it's worked and I've felt it work on me. Thank You Mom for being such a vitamin nut. We don't bother with flu shots and didn't get the roto vax. And in that same line, we've never gotten those illnesses yet. I know we are lucky. I know I am taking my chances.

Everything mutates eventually whether there's a vax for it or not. You take your chances either way and live with those decisions and consequences by doing your own research. Is there ever going to be enough money to decipher mutations carried and delivered by vaxed and non vaxed groups? No way, No how. It’s just too complicated by big money and big government. But I’m glad there are both camps to fuel the studies that we will always need.

[Jeanne]

A study released just today. I am not up to speed on this but I heard the blurb this am in the car.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/M/MED_VACCINE_SAFETY?SITE=KYWAM&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

[wellyes]

Do areas with larger numbers of unvax. children still have for example chicken pox parties to give their kids natural exposure? It seems you could be stuck - you don't vax, but as there are less cases of these diseases, you're kids may not get natural exposure when young like many of us did.

This is definitely something non-vaxers complain about. I've read a lot of "I had measles as a kid, it was no big deal" posts on anti-vax boards. But then again, measles are usually no big deal here. But it can be. And measles in third-world countries has something like a 10% death rate. I really don't want to mess around with that kind of disease, unless I was convinced that vaccines were unsafe. Which I am not.

I do think the vax intent is truly noble. I asked my OB why on earth they give HepB shots to newborns: it's a disease transmitted through sex or shared needles, for crying out loud. Her answer was: "We are trying to eradicate liver cancer". No more HepB would bring us a long way towards that goal. Wouldn't that be wonderful?

[brittone2]

A study released just today. I am not up to speed on this but I heard the blurb this am in the car.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/M/MED_VACCINE_SAFETY?SITE=KYWAM&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

Well, the kids in this study got "some" vs. "more" but not none.

It isn't just the thimerosal. There's aluminum (a known neurotoxin) in many vaxes. There's yeast which some people think may contribute tot he GI problems seen in children with autism. http://www.chop.edu/consumer/jsp/division/generic.jsp?id=75812.

There's a host of other ingredients that parents have concerns about.

[JBaxter]

I was reading something interesting on MDC. These case (5) in Minnesota were over the course of 2008. 2 of the cases were 11 months apart. They werent clustered together as I thought....