I dont really agree with immunizations. Am I crazy? And what are some alternatives?

MOST HELPFUL POSTS

April - posted on 05/05/2009

76

7

11

It seems like everyone agrees to hold off or completely avoid having their child immunized. I think this is absolutely crazy. I don't mean to offend anyone but the immunizations are out there for the safety of your child and that of other children. I just spent a clinical rotation at a pediatrician's office as a graduating nurse as of next week and was shocked to find out the number of parents that refuse immunizations for their children.



It is true that there are some immunizations out there that still contain trace amounts of mercury and if you are concerned about that you should find a pediatrician that offers shots without it and they are all in a transition phase to go solely to mercury free shots in the near future.



I am also a mother of two and have had my children vaccinated. Someone mentioned the side effects from the immunizations being a reason for deferring them- they are generally mild and include such things as localized redness, soreness, and low grade fever. Would you rather your child become seriously ill than have some mild discomfort for a day or two?



Is everyone here deferring all shots or just certain ones and if so, which ones?



As far as the POSSIBLE autism link with immunizations which let me remind everyone is not proven- some of the diseases that a child could get w/o immunizations, can be life threatening versus an autism possibility which is not life threatining.



Breastfeeding does NOT protect your child against these diseases for 6-9 months. It does contain antibodies and provide passive immunity to the things that the mother has either had or been immunized against but not those in which she hasn't- this is a very important factor to keep in mind. Babies' immune systems are capable of functioning after about 2 months which is why immunizations are begun at this time. Please please please get accurate information before deferring any shots and talk to your child's doctor about the pro's and con's. It is for their safety and that of other children.

Debbie - posted on 05/05/2009

2

8

0

I am AMAZED at the number of people who won't immunize! All the more reason my daughter has been. If you're convinced something like polio won't be found in this country again, just check those international flights! We just had retired friend who died and had polio all his life. He lived an amazing life & became a federal court judge but do you really want to saddle your child with those health issues? There is a reason vaccines were developed for these diseases. Some can cause death or do permanent damage to your child's health (heart condition, sterility, etc). Some cause side effects that last the rest of your life (say, lockjaw). Get your facts from the medical community, not entertainment "news" that feeds off the emotions of distraught parents. As for chickenpox...just ask an older person (usually 60+) who's had/has shingles, if they wished they had a vaccine to avoid the disease. My father and father-in-law have had shingles in the last 2 years starting when my child was 1. My father-in-law was on pain medication for a full year of shingles...and this is a man who's been thru more surgery than I care to think about (6 on his back, both shoulders, both knees and both ears) over 50 years of physical work. Ask questions, read, do research, find out the real choices of individual immunizations.

Ally - posted on 05/05/2009

385

11

16

Get the vaccine book by dr.sears. It gives you the straight facts and lets you as the parent decide. I feel that there are some kids who need their vaccines early on and others who may benefit from letting their immune system develop. If you are the type of parent who formula fed from day one, handed your baby over to daycare at 8 weeks and takes them out everywhere with you ...i would strongly encourage you to stick with the recommended vaccination schedule.



However, If you are breastfeeding (one year is good, two is better) you stay at home with your child (they aren't in daycare or church nurseries) and you avoid going out with your baby to crowded places then you can feel pretty safe in holding off and spacing them out.



We waited until 4 months to begin vaccinating we skipped the rotavirus vaccine and got the dtap shot at 4, 6, and 8 months and pc and hib at 5,7, 9 months. we are skipping polio and hep b for now but will get them later on and are skipping the mmr and chickenpox all together. The ones our daughter is recieving are the one that my husband and I bother felt were the most important. We picked them b/c we have both seen nasty cases of whooping cough (he as a paramedic and me as a nurse) ,pneumococcus bacteria lives almost anywhere so we chose to vaccinate against that and hib while rare these days can be fatal if contracted.



we left out hep b because it is an std and unless the mother is positive the baby should have no risk of coming in contact with this. the new rotavirus vaccine is just a little too new for me and I want to give it a couple years ( we will probably give it next time around if all goes well with it bc it isn't really a question of if your child will get roatvirus ..it's when!) wild Polio hasn't existed in the entire western hemisphere since the 1970s (the only cases were those CAUSED BY the oral polio vaccine which is why it was discontinued in 2000 and now we use the IPV.) The MMR and chicken pox are protecting a gainst illnesses that are meant to be had in childhood and while i would never purposely expose my child to them if they come in contact with these viruses and are cared for properly they will have lifelong immunity...compared to about 10 years of immunity with the vaccine...so when the vaccine wears off you have basically set your kids up to get these dieases as adolescents or adults when they are much more deadly (cuz come on people when was the last time you had an mmr booster shot??)..the immunity is not lifelong as some will lead you to believe. Do your research and best of luck!

Ezzy - posted on 05/16/2009

9

0

0

My son is NOT vaccinated. Am I worried? No. Unfortunately, the hospital gave my son a Hepatitis B vaccine after his birth without my consent. He has suffered greatly, from eczema to many, many, food allergies. I am so glad I listened to that little voice because the DTaP vaccine contains milk (Casamino Acid), the flu & the MMR vaccine contain Egg. (Egg Protein). Both of these things, my son is very allergic too. I can only imagine what would've happened if I went against my instinct. Also, it's not just the allergies I am worried about. I worry about Aluminum, Mercury (regardless of the amount, its the 2nd known nuerotoxin...'nuff said), Formaldehyde on top of the other crap that is in there. Oh, and the fact that vaccines are grown on aborted fetal cells, no thanks. I'll pass. My son is 20 months old and still breastfeeding, he still receives immunities. I am also a stay at home mom. We're also on a very restricted and limited diet because of his food allergies. I am not worried about these diseases because I have researched and I have made an informed choice regarding these vaccines. My son, aside from his food allergies, is very healthy. He is rarely sick. I would hope he catches measles, chicken pox, mumps...etc. because that would guarantee a lifelong immunity, not a "what if" because of vaccines. Vaccinations are not a guarantee and vaccines don't prevent anything. You can still get a disease if you are vaccinated 'against' it, it just may be worse because vaccines compromise the immune system. Oh, I just wanted to add one more thing - just because MY son is unvaccinated does not mean that his is putting YOUR child at risk. IF vaccines work, then you have NOTHING to worry about. Unless, you have that small doubt in your mind.

Okay, I think I've rambled enough. :)

Amber - posted on 05/12/2009

68

5

0

Quoting Erika:






Quoting Jessica:

the immunizations are given for a reason! i can understand that u have reservations about injecting foreign bodies into ur child but the strain given is very small and the virus is always dead, meaning that ur child has a 1 in a billion chance of actually contractin that strain from the immunization!









I'm not sure where you did your research, but this is untrue!  5 vaccines (measles, mumps, rubella, oral polio, and varicella) are LIVE virus vaccines. Live virus vaccines can sometimes infect the recipient and can even sometimes infect those in close contact with the recipient. These vaccines are given to young children, and vaccine immunity sometimes wears off for adults. This can put a pregnant mother or immunocompromised adult at risk by being around a recently vaccinated child with live virus vaccines.






Other vaccine facts you may not be aware of:






http://tinyurl.com/rcf6oc





An important detail Erika has left out b/c I think she may enjoy using fear to bully others into her way of thinking is that the vaccines that contain live viruses do not contain healthy ready to infect strains. The live virus has been tenuated a fancy medical word for weaked. It is true this can pose some risk to immunocomprimised persons, which is why before the vaccines are given it is routine to ask  if your family is regularly in contact with an immunocomprimised person, such as a cancer patient. In addition there is only a small window of about 3-4 weeks that the recently vaccinated person poses any danger to such a person. I've never heard anything to imply that pregnant women are affected by contact with a recently immunized person, if Erika would be so kind as to reveal that source I'd like to read it. Vaccines do sometimes wear out for adults, which is the purpose of immune titers a way to check a persons immunity to a disease or virus, and subsequent boosters of the vaccine if they are no longer immune.



 

This conversation has been closed to further comments

359 Comments

View replies by

[deleted account]

Hi Kim! Your posting on this was a few yrs ago, though, I do not vaccinate my child who is now 13. I stopped injecting her at the age of 4. From birth til 4, she was constantly sick, in the hospitals, home all the time with the flu! Since I started not getting her vaccinated, she has been a very healthy young girl and continues to be!! Not once in the hospital, the only doctor appt. is her yrly check up. The doctors do insist on vaccines, though I stand my ground:) I will not allow the government to tell me that i have to inject her! I have waivers for the schools, so I haven't had any problems there. Good luck, continue!!

Janet - posted on 06/11/2009

6

6

0

If your decision to not vaccinate affects your child for the rest of his life , how do you explain this to your child. Which is the worst of the two evils?

Janet - posted on 06/11/2009

6

6

0

If your decision to not vaccinate affects your child for the rest of his life , how do you explain this to your child. Which is the worst of the two evils?

[deleted account]

I am the crunchiest, granola, Birkenstock wearing hippie mom you will ever meet, but this is one area where I am more middle of the road. Younger people (30 and below) have the luxury of arguing about preservative levels and side effects because of many years of immunization. People my age and my parents' age remember what it was like when people were NOT routinely immunized so it's much more clear to us. I HAD mumps. I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy. It is a painful disease with huge potential for complications. I watched my brother almost die from measles at 11 months. He lived by the grace of God ONLY. I have SEEN a baby with pertussis. A more heartbreaking sight you will never see. Rubella used to caused birth defects and stillbirth routinely when my grandmother was young. My parents knew people (and I met a couple of them many years later) who had polio and were debilitated for life, nearly everyone my grandmother's age knows someone who died of it. Whatever minuscule risk there is to a vaccine, it is far outweighed by the reduction of suffering and death that they have brought. For every person who can tell you all the theories about how autism or whatever is caused by vaccines, there are studies that show how it isn't. The bottom line is that you have the freedom to make the choice NOT to get vaccines if you'd like but that freedom was brought to you by a generation of people taking the vaccine and making the diseases rare enough that your child might not actually get them. On the other hand, my earth mother side kicks in and I think they DO go overboard on them. We homeschool so we don't have to worry about every vaccine that comes down the pike being mandatory. I also had chickenpox when I was a child (as did 99% of people born in the 60s). When my kids were little I found someone who had it and took my kids over to visit so they could get it. Chickenpox is a disease which is harmless in children but potentially fatal in adult. It makes no sense to immunize in childhood and then have it wear off in adulthood. I think the chickenpox vaccine is a godsend for kids with immune disorders or other health deficits but it's just silly and potentially harmful in the long run (we just don't know yet, it hasn't been long enough) for normal, healthy kids. I also opt out of Hepatitis and HPV vaccines. If you live a moral life and don't do drugs the likelihood of you needing those vaccines is small. If my children later decide to live a risky lifestyle, they can deal with that issue themselves. I think if a disease is mostly harmless (like chickenpox) or it can be prevented in other ways (like HPV or Hep) I opt out of the vaccine because no matter how safe they are or are not, nothing is perfect and if our body can function as God made it and take care of itself, I let it do it. Sorry so long, I'm gabby but I hope this helps!

[deleted account]

The benefits do not outweigh the risks for me. 3 of my kids were damaged by vaccines so my 4th is unvaccinated. To say the vaccinated kids are keeping the unvaccinated ones healthy is ridiculous - as only 2% of the adult population is fully up to date with their boosters and vaccine immunity wanes over time, the diseases are still circulating and probably always will.

I hope my child will get all the diseases I got as a child and as he eats a healthy diet and is still breastfed Im certain he will be fine. He has had flu, rotavirus and measles and recovered very quickly every time. He is much healthier than his vaccinated siblings, has never had a course of antibiotics or in fact, seen a doctor since his 8 week check up. Its a personal choice I made after my earlier experiences - I wish Id done more research at the time, but it was pre-internet and the only info available was what my doctor told me.

I agree that everyone should do their own research before making the decision

Heather - posted on 06/11/2009

1

87

0

My kids are all fine! The benefits outweigh the risks completely in my book! Do your research, its a personal decision, but the only reason the non vaccinated children stay healthy is due to the vaccinated children that are not contaminating them. I use over the counter fever medicines only when necessary. A fever does fight off a bodies infection but can also lead to seizures and brain damage if not brought down and spikes too high. I don't know about you, but wait till your little one is laying there with a horrible fever ( because it lays them out horribly) and a little motrin or tylenol perks them right back. The fever is brutal to them. I wouldn't not take something during one of my migraines. My opinion

Ezzy - posted on 05/16/2009

9

0

0

Just to add - my mother told me that if she knew she had the choice, she would NOT have vaccinated my brother and I. She thought it was a requirement for school. Little did she know, that each state has exemptions.

Erika - posted on 05/15/2009

11

18

1

No you are not crazy, you are just concerned :). I have vaccinated all of my children, 10, 7, 3 with no problems. I would just talk to your pediatrician about the vaccination schedule, I don't necessarily feel that a child should receive so many shots at one time. If your child is in school or a daycare center they are more at risk. Immunuzations aren't 100% fool proof, as my fully-vaccinated son contracted mumps at the age of 7. You just have to be informed and weigh the risks with the benefits.

Amanda - posted on 05/15/2009

4

5

0

Hi. I dont think you are crazy as we are all entitled to free speech and thought. However from a scientists point of view, immunization is one of those breakthroughs that have more than helped protect our children. Although none of us want our children to be unwell, and natural immunization is often the best (naturally produce antibodies via having the disease), immunization programmes have two functions. These are primarily protecting children against various diseases which can often have lasting effects and secondarily, helping to eradicate the disease completely. For example, small pox and polio are two such diseases which have been eradicated. In addition, diseases caused by harmful agents become resistant to treatment through mutation of the agents. Therefore if the disease is not eradicated, we are forever trying to find successful treatments to these, with our children suffering in the short term. So in all fairness, immunization programmes do not only protect our children but also those of future generations. I hope this has helped to alleviate your concern but as I said we are free to do what we feel is best through being given a choice. The above is just something to consider when making that choice. No offence meant at all.

Best of luck,

Amanda x

Amanda - posted on 05/15/2009

4

5

0

Hi. I dont think you are crazy as we are all entitled to free speech and thought. However from a scientists point of view, immunization is one of those breakthroughs that have more than helped protect our children. Although none of us want our children to be unwell, and natural immunization is often the best (naturally produce antibodies via having the disease), immunization programmes have two functions. These are primarily protecting children against various diseases which can often have lasting effects and secondarily, helping to eradicate the disease completely. For example, small pox and polio are two such diseases which have been eradicated. In addition, diseases caused by harmful agents become resistant to treatment through mutation of the agents. Therefore if the disease is not eradicated, we are forever trying to find successful treatments to these, with our children suffering in the short term. So in all fairness, immunization programmes do not only protect our children but also those of future generations. I hope this has helped to alleviate your concern but as I said we are free to do what we feel is best through being given a choice. The above is just something to consider when making that choice. No offence meant at all.

Best of luck,

Amanda x

Val - posted on 05/14/2009

5

3

0

I understand the conflicting emotions about immunizations and as a mum you always have a choice - My son's jabs were all over he place because he was unable to be immunized for a year because of illness. A thought - immunizations are about community and protecting the weakest in the community. For 18 months we had to rely on an immunized community to protect William as his immune system was compromised by chemotherapy. There are a lot of children who rely on the rest of the 'herd' being immunized to keep them safe. A perspective I had never considered when I first started finding about immunizations...

Amber - posted on 05/14/2009

53

11

1

If critical thought was actually practiced in this society we wouldn't be having this dicussion. There are hundreds, possibly even thousands of factors to take into consideration. When you look at the pros and the cons of getting vaccinated, the educated parent would choose the vaccine. Allowing your child to become sick simply because you chose not to do some decent, unbiased research is extremely selfish.

Jackie - posted on 05/14/2009

1

9

0

my son died aged 15 because he didnt have his measels vaccine,. think could you deal with the guilt if anything happened to your child

Aimee - posted on 05/14/2009

3

4

0

i hope none of your children are going to school with my little boy, cause if my little boy got whooping cough or some other DEADLY disease i would blame all parents out there that don't immunize their children. Do a search on FaceBook for Dana Elizabeth McCaffery and put urself in their shoes and see how u feel. I strongly believe in immunizations

Melanie - posted on 05/14/2009

27

54

0

I think people need to read up on the conditions we immuized against.Many can result in death!!A few are coming back due to children not recieving immunizations.I jsut feel they need to give less in one shot but this are important to a childs health.All this some are nessary some arent is rubbish,They were needed at some point to be produced and to stop giving some could result with the condition coming back.Look at measles?!!someone said they were chemicals,maybe but these chemicals could save a childs live!The immunizations can cause reactions and media have done alot of stories but many are not been confirmed and just linked.If was just a danger would the government /healthcare risk giving them??Overall i think you need to weigh up what immunizations could do(according to some docs research not confirmed) with the condtion its for(how rare it is now and what it is?).

Jnene - posted on 05/14/2009

4

11

0

so our gov is whacked (and in some issues like this i agree). and that is a whole other issue, since they are the ones wanting it. but i also think adhd is an ailment that is enviromental OR inheritable...so, if they had a vax for that should we race to the dr? no...but there are more cases supporting the other side...and while this question prompted 318 posts, the mother will do as she sees fit(and she has a lot of researching available to her thru these posts)...as is her right. we all carry something at one point in time or the other...and i have many ailments-but do not attribute them to my vax-as they are consistent w/after effects of abuse to my body (car wreck or other)...just out of curiosity. what is your profession, how old are you, how many kids do you have, and have they been vaxed

Deepali - posted on 05/14/2009

44

3

1

Jnene, you are making the assumption that once your child is vaccinated he/she is completely 'protected' from the diseases they are vaxed for but that is not the case. Children who received MMR shot end up getting mumps and measles, same goes for CP. So why is it always assumed that the one who is not vaccinated is putting others at risk while the opposite is true. Vaxed people also carry those bacteria/virus around sometimes asymptomatically and can very well pass it on to others who are vulnerable.



It is true that life-threatening adverse events from vaccines are rare or rarely reported and perhaps attributed to everything else but the vaccine but the dramatic rise in other problems like allergies, arthritis, respiratory problems, juvenile diabetes, etc can be linked to vaccines. I don't think that makes a small percentage of the population. Not to forget kids diagnosed with ADHD etc.

Jnene - posted on 05/14/2009

4

11

0

i see all of the facts, and see all of the "answers"...but i have a son who is 21, and twin daughters that are six ( who were all immunized)...and what i do not see is the issue of the un-immunized child going into society...as a student (impossible they will not be able to enter..), day care...what if they choose-or you as a parent choose for them to non intentionally put them at risk-or others...since the other side is not being reprsented. there are a lot of facts about why not...but what about the why, and the fact that a very sm percentile are affected by any of the shots? where are the mothers that support this...just wondering.

Alice - posted on 05/14/2009

12

6

1

i was exactly like this before i got him injected.... i made sure i found out what it was why he needed it e.c.t xx

Sarah - posted on 05/14/2009

25

28

2

on a side note, I've noticed that some mums out there are saying that as long as you're breastfeeding the child is naturally immunised. This is only partially true. While the child is exclusively breastfeeding it has partially immunity with the antibodies that the mother provides. Which means that if the mum has little or no antibodies to something out there then the child has little or no immunity to it. Plus as soon as you start weaning from the breast, as in introduce food to the child. that immunity drops

Deepali - posted on 05/13/2009

44

3

1

Jenifer, I think the very reason the vaccines are not working properly is because they are not stopping carriage and transmission in vaxed persons.



http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cg...

In the course of a large pertussis vaccine efficacy trial we realized that investigator compliance could have a major impact on calculated vaccine efficacy.



Conclusions. Our data suggest that observer compliance (observer bias), can significantly inflate calculated vaccine efficacy. It is likely that all recently completed efficacy trials have been effected by this type of observer bias and all vaccines have considerably less efficacy against mild disease than published data suggest.



http://www.ima.org.il/imaj/ar06may-2.pdf

Pertussis is considered an endemic disease, characterized by an epidemic every 2–5 years. This rate of exacerbations has not changed, even after the introduction of mass vaccination – a fact that indicates the efficacy of the vaccine in preventing the disease but not the transmission of the causative agent (B. pertussis) within the population [19].



http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol6no5/pd...

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.



http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=acel...



Hope this helps to clarify the point I am making.

Tarz - posted on 05/13/2009

2

8

0

And your not crazy kids in my family have had bad reactions and nobody really listens!

Debbie - posted on 05/13/2009

1

7

0

Not crazy at all. I have 2 children and both were immunized. It is very very rare to have a serious illness as a result from immunization. As your child gets closer to day and school illness from not being immunized are a bigger threat than getting your child immunized. I agree with spreading the shots out some. It's a big decesion so you are not crazy at all.

Shannon - posted on 05/13/2009

7

19

0

You should read the book, Natural Baby and Childcare by Dr. Lauren Feder. She is a MD doctor who changed to holistic medicine practice. Her practice combines both. Definitely read it. It is great. We are going to her workshop in LA in July. The book is wonderful. It will explain all your options for vaccines.

Lacey - posted on 05/13/2009

70

118

5

Thats another problem with vaccines eventually they do not remain cost effective and become unavailible so when the disease reemerges it is into a population with no natural immunity. Think native americans and the small pox.

Lacey - posted on 05/13/2009

70

118

5

your not crazy. there are lots of potential side affects to immunizations and studies that link them to problems such as autism ADHD and other ailments. Also they may limit the bodies ability to defend itself against other illnesses it may come in contact with. The best defense is to keep the immune system strong, vitamin supplements, vitamin c, healthy diet, regular chiropractic visits, excercise. Use antibiotics and fever remedies only as a last resort as and follow directions verbatum. Using antibiotics to frequently, not finishing antibiotics, or taking them other than as directed leads to bacteria becoming resistant. Fever is a natural part of the bodies immune system and is not serious unless over 103 persistantly. Also you may need to find healthcare proffesionals, chiropracter and legal defense to defend your decision when you kids enter daycare or school. I personally do have my kids vaccinated having come to the conclusion the stress and social unacceptance to be more of a risk than getting the vaccines. It is your decision. I don't believe either choice is crazy and both sides are equally debatable to risk and benifits.

Vanessa - posted on 05/13/2009

1

8

0

There are many people who have strong feelings on whether to vaccinate or not, my mind was made up when I researched what was contained in the vaccinations (wow!), what company was manufacturing them, and where the trail lead in regards to who allowed it to be okayed and why, there are a lot of really great websites out there that will actually give you factual information on how the vaccine was developed and by who, along with the side effects of them. My father got polio from the polio vaccine, that along with a lot of valid information out there on vaccines being linked to autism and other conditions, helped me to focus more on a natural approach, of trusting the body - given that it has allowed our species to get to where it is, and has evolved quite nicely. Also take a look into possible scenarios regarding what the worst case scenario was if your child did indeed get the illness that the vaccine was to prevent them from...is it treatable? Having a breastfed healthy baby, with a caring, aware mum, is usually a much better safety measure than vaccinating them (injecting them with the actual illness - which has not been proven to create an immunity). Wish you all the best! :)

[deleted account]

Actually, in the article that I posted they were discussing ACT as an adjuvant. Seems there's been much study of this. I wonder if they'll be changing the aP formulation at time soon.

I was wondering what in particular you wanted to share in the last article you posted - from Ped Infection Diseases. They state in that article:
"Pertussis vaccine efficacy studies have demonstrated a decrease in the
transmission of B. pertussis infection from vaccinees to household contacts.(22,31,32) Observational studies have demonstrated a decrease in B. pertussis incidence rates in
unvaccinated subgroups when vaccination coverage is >80%.14,(33–35)"

This seems to support what I had stated earlier - vaccination reduces pertussis transmission. I understand immunity wanes a bit quicker than natural immunity, and that the vaccine doesn't guarantee immunity, but no one is claiming otherwise.

The second article, again, supports the idea that the acellular vaccine is not as good as the whole cell vaccine, particularly with children under 5 years. I certainly think these vaccines need to be continually revisited - like we discussed with HiB, evolution is at work. The authors say that:
"If future research provides evidence to support an association between higher incidence rates and antigenic divergence, then the use of both whole-cell and acellular vaccines may better protect children against a greater variety of B. pertussis strains that may be circulating in a population."

I didn't get an indication from either article that pertussis vaccination was not effective at preventing infection or transmission. Only that there are ways to make the vaccine even more effective than it already is.

As for the graphs from CSICOP - sorry about that. I'll try to pull up the data from the health departments directly - less chance of errors that way.

Deepali - posted on 05/13/2009

44

3

1

Jenifer, I think you meant ACT to be used as an antigen not adjuvant.



http://journals.lww.com/pidj/Abstract/20...

Despite decades of high vaccination coverage, pertussis has remained endemic and reemerged as a public health problem in many countries in the past 2 decades. Waning of vaccine-induced immunity has been cited as one of the reasons for the observed epidemiologic trend. A review of the published data on duration of immunity reveals estimates that infection-acquired immunity against pertussis disease wanes after 4-20 years and protective immunity after vaccination wanes after 4-12 years. Further research into the rate of waning of vaccine-acquired immunity will help determine the optimal timing and frequency of booster immunizations and their role in pertussis control.



http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/article...

These results suggest that current immunization practices may not be adequate in protecting infants and children less than 5 years of age against pertussis. Altering available acellular formulations or adopting immunization practices used in some European countries may increase the clinical effectiveness of routine pertussis vaccination programs among infants and preschool children.



In the Sweden pertussis graph that you posted, the author says that the Pertussis rate in 1975 was around 50 per 100,000 but if you look at the corresponding graph it shows around 25-30 per 100,000. I wonder how many other errors have been made.



Also it is well-known that pertussis goes undiagnosed or misdiagnosed in a vaccinated person. So I am little wary of referring to that chart.

Geneva - posted on 05/13/2009

103

25

6

I'll quote my pediatrician here. He said that parents who choose not to vaccinate are "selfish". If they thought there was any chance their child could actually contract any of the diseases we vaccinate against, they'd opt for the vaccine. By choosing not to vaccinate, they are relying on the rest of the parents to protect their children. My son has gotten every one of his vaccines, & he'll continue to do so. No, I don't like watching my baby get 4 shots at a time, & dealing with him the day after is no fun, but he will not have any memory of this, & I believe as parents sometimes we have to do what is really best for our children instead of what is easiest.

Deepali - posted on 05/13/2009

44

3

1

Jenifer, here's another look at ACT

http://iai.asm.org/cgi/content/abstract/...

Neutralizing Antibodies to Adenylate Cyclase Toxin Promote Phagocytosis of Bordetella pertussis by Human Neutrophils

The whole cell pertussis vaccine was supposed to be more effective but definetely not safer and hence was discontinued.



Also pertussis is most contagious when you think you have a cold, and there's no evidence that the vaccine prevents this part. So by the time you actually develop symptoms of cough etc, you have most likely passed the contagious period. So I am not sure what sort of protection you are looking for.



I also seem to remember that most pertussis outbreaks have been found in vaccinated population. Let me check and see if I can put up a link for that.



Also the theory that in some cases vaxed persons are more likely to spread pertussis than unvaxed ones has something to with the original antigenic sin. I will try to haul that up too.

[deleted account]

Quoting Deepali:

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml...
Pertussis, an acute, infectious cough illness, remains endemic in the United States despite routine childhood pertussis vaccination for more than half a century and high coverage levels in children for more than a decade¹

Also there have been studies which proved that children vaxed with DTaP maybe more contagious than unvaxed kids after they have contracted pertussis.


My apologies, Deepali, I didn't realize you had responded to me in this thread. As for the study above, it is fascinating, but I don't think they said that the vaccine didn't work, rather than the vaccine did not work via the mechanism that they tested. The conclude:



"Immunity can be achieved in several ways. The acellular vaccines presently in use are highly effective at preventing severe disease but are less effective at preventing bacterial infection (20). Presumably, they achieve protection by blocking bacterial attachment and neutralizing the adverse effects of pertussis toxin."



In fact, they only assert that adenylate cyclase toxin would make a good adjunctivant and improve the effectiveness of the vaccine. But that's not really new info, as the whole-cell pertussis vaccine provided much better protection. Significant, yet incomplete, protection is better than no protection. I'm not sure if you've seen this article yet, but I think it does a good job of investigating the type of immune response activated by the acellular vaccine with different adjunctivants:



http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/article...



As for the other link, I think 'endemic' is a relative term. Here in the US, we didn't see pertussis skyrocket in the 1990's the way countries that pulled the whole-cell pertussis from the vaccination schedule did. In Sweden, the pertussis rate went from 50 per 100,000 to 3370 per 100,000 when the vaccine was abandoned in the 1980's. Their rates dropped again when they introduced the acellular vaccine to the schedule. Lots of pertussis rate graphs to look at here:



http://www.csicop.org/si/2004-01/anti-va...



I am well aware that the pertussis vaccine is less effective and has a shorter duration than other vaccines, but it still offers protection. You also mentioned at you'd seen a study indicating vaccinated people more likely to spread pertussis than the unvaccinated. Did you have a link to that one - I'd be interested to see it if you do. Thanks!

Janie - posted on 05/13/2009

2

0

0

millions of babies have had vaccines, the vaccine scare hype is just that, hype, I protected my four girls and would do so again, in fact my youngest had bacterial meningitis when she was 14 months that was right before the vaccine came out she has not suffered any side effects but some kids were not as lucky as her after they had this terrible infection

Janie - posted on 05/13/2009

2

0

0

millions of babies have had vaccines, the vaccine scare hype is just that, hype, I protected my four girls and would do so again, in fact my youngest had bacterial meningitis when she was 14 months that was right before the vaccine came out she has not suffered any side effects but some kids were not as lucky as her after they had this terrible infection

Nicole - posted on 05/13/2009

1

16

0

My son is 11 months. We went through this discussion as well. My husband and I chose an alternate route. We decided to go ahead and allow SOME immunizations, but not all of them. Check the thymerisol (mercury) issue. Our pediatritian was great in working with us on this. We spaced out the vaccinations (pediatritian created the schedule). I was not going to have my son getting 6 vaccinations at once. That's crazy! He gets no more than 2 at a time.

Deepali - posted on 05/13/2009

44

3

1

Jenifer, why not we take one link at a time and proceed? First lets talk about how the pertussis vaccination program is not able to create 'herd immunity' because it still allows carriage and transmission in vaxed persons. SIDS is a huge and different topic which will only make us digress from the original point I am making that the pertussis vaccine does not work.



http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/333/...

Conclusions For school age children presenting to primary care with a cough lasting two weeks or more, a diagnosis of whooping cough should be considered even if the child has been immunised. Making a secure diagnosis of whooping cough may prevent inappropriate investigations and treatment.



What comments do you have to make about the first two links I had posted?

Jnene - posted on 05/12/2009

4

11

0

understand why youd be concerned. but the rewards of health out weigh the risk of not getting them. plus, be ready to home school them and have plenty of social skill building things ready, cuz they arent going to get into school...mother of 3..1:21yrs old male, @: twin girls, age 6...immunized and doin fine....

Leonne - posted on 05/12/2009

1

0

0

Have you seen the book the well adjusted baby? written by a chiro. very interesting chapter on the dangers of immunization. I don't like them at all but I still did it. I guess the guilt of not doing it was worse that the guilt of doing it. They should make them less dangerous though. She believe that the govt has made it mandatory because of the risks and if they did people could sue them for the results.

[deleted account]

Holy Cow! between you and the other mom who are talking about immunizations this one is a hot topic! No your not crazy, I have a health care provider in my family who is very much into natural methods and they do work (I am a living testement of it) I went along with my daughters doc about the shots after she was born 6yrs ago and she had hers up until she was maybe 6 months or less or more, can't quite remember. Anyway I did my research(A Lot of research) magazine articals, 4 to 5 books that my relative lended me and I did a paper on it in college, and the internet and what I found was very scary about how they are made and the scientific proof that they do not work. So I stopped. However, I do respect those parents who choose to get their children immunized, I understand the reason, but for my children I think its best that they don't. the best you can do is if you know a child with chicken pox expose your child and make sure they get it, once they do they will be immune to it naturally. There are natural ways to protect your children from diseases without having to immunize or vaccinate. I just wanted you to know, to go with your motherly instinct not what your doc or anyone else tells you, and your not crazy.

Kylie - posted on 05/12/2009

10

17

1

Quoting Sondi:

my daughter is 5 years old and i havent given her any and i dont plan to


God has given us the brains and technology to create a way to eradicate certain diseases for our children and you won't give your child the benefit and just hope that your child won't get sick.  Unfortunately you are making it more dangerous for the rest of our children to let these diseases carry on through more generations and give them the chance to mutate and become even more debilitating and deadly.  You should have a really good think on the repercussions of your decision.

Kylie - posted on 05/12/2009

10

17

1

Quoting Alicia:

hey kim! my name is alicia. i have 4 under 5yrs old. here's the truth. a baby, as long as it's breastfeed, does NOT need immunizations until their 6-9months of age. if they are in daycare... u might want to get them sooner. they DO NOT need the hep B shot. the only way a child or adult can get that is through sexual fluids or needles.. basically it can't live outside the body. you will have to find a doctor who is willing to hold off on giving shots and also is ok w/ not getting certain ones at all. the ones to get are DTaP, and the MMR. the rest aren't as nessary if your staying at home w/ your little one(s). if you have any other ?'s i'd be happy to try and answer them or find the answer for you.



OH MY GOD! Are you nuts?  Do you not take your kids out of the house and do they not have any contact with anything ever such as shopping centres, playgrounds.  I am guessing that they do and that they would be coming into contact with adults and children alike which make them susceptable to the same diseases as being in child care.  If you don't want the immunisations with mercury fine there are alternatives but don't say a child doesn't need immunising if they don't go to child care.  How irresponsible of you.  Do you want to see a return of the diseases immunisations have eradicated?

Amy - posted on 05/12/2009

17

7

1

I work with an immunization unit for the county. Although I test kids for lead screening and don't actually give the innoculations. All my kids are immunized but to each their own. I think as a parent you have to trust your own instincts. If you wanted you could choose the few that you wanted you wouldn't have to get them all. I'd hate for my kids to get sick but like I said always trust your mommy instinct everyone will have their own opinion.

Tonya - posted on 05/12/2009

1

15

0

Girl, immunizations are imperative for children. Babies are born with NO immune system so they're susceptible to every disease and no parent wants their beautiful child sick. So please immunize your child it's very IMPORTANT. It won't hurt them it will save them!!!!!!!!

Traci - posted on 05/12/2009

1

4

0

I believe you should get all the shots the doctor recommends... why do we want revert back to the days when these shots were not available? We're supposed to learn from our history not relive it.

Tara - posted on 05/12/2009

66

7

1

Quoting Amber:



Quoting Erika:








Quoting Jessica:

the immunizations are given for a reason! i can understand that u have reservations about injecting foreign bodies into ur child but the strain given is very small and the virus is always dead, meaning that ur child has a 1 in a billion chance of actually contractin that strain from the immunization!












I'm not sure where you did your research, but this is untrue!  5 vaccines (measles, mumps, rubella, oral polio, and varicella) are LIVE virus vaccines. Live virus vaccines can sometimes infect the recipient and can even sometimes infect those in close contact with the recipient. These vaccines are given to young children, and vaccine immunity sometimes wears off for adults. This can put a pregnant mother or immunocompromised adult at risk by being around a recently vaccinated child with live virus vaccines.








Other vaccine facts you may not be aware of:








http://tinyurl.com/rcf6oc









An important detail Erika has left out b/c I think she may enjoy using fear to bully others into her way of thinking is that the vaccines that contain live viruses do not contain healthy ready to infect strains. The live virus has been tenuated a fancy medical word for weaked. It is true this can pose some risk to immunocomprimised persons, which is why before the vaccines are given it is routine to ask  if your family is regularly in contact with an immunocomprimised person, such as a cancer patient. In addition there is only a small window of about 3-4 weeks that the recently vaccinated person poses any danger to such a person. I've never heard anything to imply that pregnant women are affected by contact with a recently immunized person, if Erika would be so kind as to reveal that source I'd like to read it. Vaccines do sometimes wear out for adults, which is the purpose of immune titers a way to check a persons immunity to a disease or virus, and subsequent boosters of the vaccine if they are no longer immune.






 





The misinformation in your post is deeply upsetting.



1.  Antibody titers do not = immunity.



2.  Vaccinated individuals can shed the virus for upto SIX WEEKS after they are vaccinated....making the virus able to spread to immunocompromised individuals, pregnant women, newborn babies for at least SIX WEEKS, not just 3-4 as you stated.



3.  Erika is not using fear, she is using researched knowledge. Do your reseach.



 



Copied from the link Erika wrote in her post from here: http://www.vaccineinfo.net/immunization/...



 





7 vaccines (polio, hepatitis A, varicella, pertussis, diphtheria, tetanus, and haemophilus influenzae b) have NOT been "evaluated or tested for their carcinogenic potential, mutagenic potential, or for impairment of fertility" or "reproductive capacity" according the vaccine manufacturers' own product inserts.



3 vaccines (varicella, hepatitis A, and rubella) were cultured in human diploid cells (eg. human embryonic lung cell cultures and human diploid cell cultures WI-38 and MRC-5). The Chickenpox vaccine contains "residual components of MRC-5 cells including DNA and protein."



6 vaccines (polio, hepatitis B, hepatitis A, pertussis, diphtheria, and tetanus) contain formaldehyde - a highly noxious and carcinogenic preservative.



5 vaccines (hepatitis B, pertussis, diphtheria, tetanus, and haemophilus influenzae b) contain thimerosal, a mercury derivative preservative BANNED by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in over-the-counter (OTC) drug preparations because of questions over safety. (Federal Register: April 22, 1998 (Volume 63, Number 77)][Page 19799-19802]



5 vaccines (hepatitis B, hepatitis A, pertussis, diphtheria, and tetanus) contain aluminum as an adjuvant. Aluminum accumulates in brain, muscle and bone tissue and can be linked to causing fibrosarcomas (cancerous tumors) at the injection site.



5 vaccines (measles, mumps, polio, varicella, and diphtheria) are developed from animal ingredients including cell cultures of chick embryos, monkey kidney cells, fetal bovine serum, and embryonic guinea pig cell cultures. There has been a moratorium in this country on animal organ transplants in humans because of concerns of people contracting latent animal viruses. Despite the history of unscreened animal viruses infecting humans from injectable products like vaccines [monkey cells and SV40 virus and bovine serum and "Mad Cow Disease" (bovine spongiform encephalopathy)], this practice continues with vaccines.



5 vaccines (measles, mumps, rubella, polio, and varicella) are LIVE virus vaccines. Live virus vaccines can sometimes infect the recipient and can even sometimes infect those in close contact with the recipient. These vaccines are given to young children, and vaccine immunity sometimes wears off for adults. This can put a pregnant mother or immunocompromised adult at risk by being around a recently vaccinated child with live virus vaccines.



For ALL 11 vaccines there have been NO long term studies on the cumulative effect on the child's developing immune system of combining all these vaccines together.



For ALL 11 vaccines the biological mechanism for why some children react to a vaccine is not understood.



For ALL 11 vaccines there are no genetic or other lab screening tests available to determine which children will react to a vaccine.



Tara - posted on 05/12/2009

66

7

1

Quoting Jenifer:

Did the problem that you anticipate with chicken pox occur with measles after the vaccine was introduced? In the 1950's there were certainly people like you claiming the burden of measles would be shifted from children to adults. Why did this never occur? Since it did not, why do you assume it will happen with chicken pox?

As for the effectiveness of vaccines, yes, I've seen those graphs before. They are only measuring the death rate from measles. What about the number of measles cases? Since measles can be treated, I have no doubt that better hygiene would play a role in reducing measles deaths. But the number of measles infections should be a better function of mass immunity. The number of measles infections dropped significantly when the vaccine was introduced. The link below has several graphs comparing cases of pertussis, polio, and measles. Of course, you can get the info directly from the CDC as well.
http://www.apologia.com/vaccines/vac_eff...

Vaccine-based immunity can pass through breastmilk just as natural immunity - but both are only going to be effective for the first few months. And as for harming the immune system, what evidence do you have of this? (And please, no whale.to links) Is your concern that vaccines overwhelm the immune system or that they do not work the immune system hard enough? I've seen both arguments presented, but neither seemed very convincing.


Check out the pages on this website:  http://www.fourteenstudies.org/index.htm...



 



1. http://www.fourteenstudies.org/ourstudie...



 



2. http://www.fourteenstudies.org/question....



 



3. http://www.fourteenstudies.org/ranked.ht...



 



4. http://www.fourteenstudies.org/goodguys....



 



5. http://www.fourteenstudies.org/nowwhat.h...



 



And these mainly have to do with autism and vaccines, however, it does discuss other immune system issues in these pages as well.

Tammy - posted on 05/12/2009

2

0

0

In response to Debbie Deaton's coment on immunization: I think she had the most educational and factual answer to your question. Throughout my parenthood I could never understand how parents take certain matters into their own hands and make 'medical decisions' that override those of professional Doctors and Pediatricians. The percent of children who become ill or die from immunization is very small.

Someone told me that they never wear a seatbelt while driving b/c they've never had an accident and their parents never wore seatbelts. It is sad to say, but this friend now lives in a wheelchair with severe memory loss and had to undergo painful surgery's.



My opinion is backed by medical truth, not b/c I have an instinctual feeling about it.

Think about the risk you leave you children with by saying "no" to immunization.

Are you willing to take that risk for your child? My daughter is now 14 and has always been immunized even though she was breastfed. She is healthy and strong.



I also agree to seek advice from a OB/GYN who is well education on this matter.

I understand that many parents talk about parenthood like it is religion and impose their 'opinions' and presume that because nothing happened to their child who wasn't immunized means that your child is safe. This is a medical issue, not a topic of what is the best diaper brand to use. That is what I call "watercooler advice". Please get medical facts on this matter and keep your baby safe.

  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
  6. 6
  7. ...
  8. 8

Join Circle of Moms

Sign up for Circle of Moms and be a part of this community! Membership is just one click away.

Join Circle of Moms