Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 09-02-2016, 01:40 AM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster GIGObuster is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 28,345
Quote:
Originally Posted by coremelt View Post
You're really grasping at straws here. If everybody spread out infant immunisations over a longer period it would still work, because they'd still get herd immunity from the rest of the population over 2 years old which is 98% of people. And anyway they're not giving them no vaccinations for two years, they can give the most at risk ones first, then others every 2 months or every month. It would cost more money, and there's no evidence that it has any benefit, and it might lead to small increase in some diseases but not a huge epidemic.

There's plenty of genuine reasons to fight anti-vaxxers but personally I'm willing to let this one slide. Pick your battles.


http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...dded-benefits/
Quote:
Concerns about vaccine safety have led up to 40 percent of parents in the U.S. to delay or refuse some vaccines for their children in hopes of avoiding rare reactions. Barriers to health care access can also cause immunization delays. But delaying some vaccines, in addition to leaving children unprotected from disease longer, can actually increase the risk of fever-related seizures, according to a new study.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention annually updates its recommended childhood immunization schedule, the only schedule endorsed by the American Academy of Pediatrics and other medical organizations. Following the CDC guidelines means children may get as many as five vaccines at one visit. But some parents space out vaccines, leading to delays in shots such as the first measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) dose, recommended when a child is between 12 and 15 months old.

The new study, published in the May 19 Pediatrics, found that administering the MMR shot or the less frequently used MMRV one (which includes the varicella, or chickenpox, vaccine) later, between 16 and 23 months, doubles the child’s risk of developing a fever-caused, or febrile, seizure as a reaction to the vaccine. The risk of a febrile seizure following the MMR is approximately one case in 3,000 doses for children aged 12 to 15 months but one case in 1,500 doses for children aged 16 to 23 months “This study adds to the evidence that the best way to prevent disease and minimize side effects from vaccines is to vaccinate on the recommended schedule,” says Simon Hambidge, lead author of the study and the director of general pediatrics at Denver Health. Otherwise, he says, an undervaccinated child is left at risk of infectious disease for a longer period. “Delaying also makes for increased visits to the doctor’s office,” he says, “along with the time and hassle and risk of exposure to other infectious diseases in the doctor’s office.” Hambidge’s previous research found that pediatric office visits might increase the risk of gastrointestinal illness (symptoms then potentially misinterpreted as a vaccine reaction).

It's not clear why the MMR and MMRV vaccines increase febrile seizure risk in the older children, but it may be simply that they receive the vaccines when they are already more susceptible to the seizures. Hambidge says evidence shows the immune system may still be maturing during the second year of life, and febrile seizures caused by viruses naturally peak around 16 to 18 months. Vaccines administered during this interval may increase the risk of fever, and therefore febrile seizures, because the vaccines rev up the immune system to mount a better immune response. These seizures do not cause any long-term health effects. “Even though they’re scary for parents, these seizures are temporary events. They don’t recur and don’t cause epilepsy,” Hambidge says.
If it was indeed just a few I would let this one slide, but there is little to justify the delay tactic and paradoxically it increases the risks on older kids.

Last edited by GIGObuster; 09-02-2016 at 01:41 AM.
  #52  
Old 09-02-2016, 01:47 AM
coremelt coremelt is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,656
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIGObuster View Post

If it was indeed just a few I would let this one slide, but there is little to justify the delay tactic and paradoxically it increases the risks on older kids.
Ok ignorance fought, I did not know this, thanks for the link. And here is a link on a study of safety of combined vaccines which I'm sure Vicsage will read because he's a reasonable person who accepts evidence when presented right?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11704723

Whoops only the abstract is available for that one. Here's one you can read the full text:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4635899/

Last edited by coremelt; 09-02-2016 at 01:50 AM.
  #53  
Old 09-02-2016, 01:55 AM
Great Antibob Great Antibob is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,095
Incidentally, there's just been a reported mumps outbreak in NW Arkansas. Unvaccinated children in affected schools are being told to stay home for about a month to limit the spread of disease.

Shame we don't have an effective medicine that might prevent mumps.
  #54  
Old 09-02-2016, 04:05 AM
coremelt coremelt is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,656
We got a live one! One of the anti-vaxxers came back to the facebook thread. This time she's spouting nonsense that "there is no scientific data to show a raised antibody response confers immunity to the disease". This is such basic biology that's been known for over 100 years. It's not studied because it's known beyond all doubt. I sent her the history of Cowpox , how it became the smallpox vaccine. I have no hope she'll actually learn, but at least she can't claim "big pharma" was behind that one !

Last edited by coremelt; 09-02-2016 at 04:06 AM.
  #55  
Old 09-02-2016, 04:30 AM
Quartz's Avatar
Quartz Quartz is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Home of the haggis
Posts: 30,370
Quote:
Originally Posted by Princhester View Post
The "I'm not anti-vax, I just think it's too much at one time" thing is a position that started to come out after it started to become clear - post-Wakefield takedown - that the basic anti-vax position was BS.
That's not correct. I heard that opinion expressed pretty much the day after Wakefield came to public attention. People suddenly started asking for the vaccines separately and were refused by the doctors and it made the press.
  #56  
Old 09-02-2016, 04:32 AM
Princhester Princhester is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 14,257
Quote:
Originally Posted by coremelt View Post
If everybody spread out infant immunisations over a longer period it would still work, because they'd still get herd immunity from the rest of the population over 2 years old which is 98% of people.
It's worse than this probably. People don't mix evenly. People with young families mix mostly with other people with young families. People with odd anti-vax ideas mix with people with similar ideas. I don't know how it would work out but the danger to herd immunity would be way worse than if it was all a completely well mixed distribution.

Also, as you say, there's no up side to this nonsense.
  #57  
Old 09-02-2016, 04:41 AM
Princhester Princhester is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 14,257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quartz View Post
That's not correct. I heard that opinion expressed pretty much the day after Wakefield came to public attention. People suddenly started asking for the vaccines separately and were refused by the doctors and it made the press.
Sort of.

Firstly I think the idea has grown. There may have been some saying that the problem was somehow overwhelming the child's immune system with multiple vaccines. But the emphasis was on the MMR/autism link, and the reason for asking for them separately (insofar as there ever was any reason that made sense) was the idea that the MMR vaccine was inherently dangerous per se.

Then the evidence that Wakefield's study was BS came out, and the message changed subtly to an emphasis on a more ephemeral claim that having vaccines close together was dangerous in some unspecified way.
  #58  
Old 09-02-2016, 05:38 AM
Broomstick's Avatar
Broomstick Broomstick is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NW Indiana
Posts: 27,550
Quote:
Originally Posted by RivkahChaya View Post
I used to think that vaccines could, very rarely, in vulnerable people, cause a form of regressive retardation with seizures, because I have worked with people who carried a "vaccine-injured" diagnosis (from the DTP shot-- in fact, it's the reason it was changed to DTaP), and one even got an award from the vaccine injury fund.
That aside - people concerned about a rare effect like an isolated seizure should read up on measles encephalitis, which used to be universally lethal. There's some treatment available these days, but honestly, a transient fever or even a febrile seizure (which happens in kids outside of vaccination), which are rare complications, is far, far better than what measles can do. My parents knew schoolmates who spent a couple years dying of measles complications. Yep, we kids all got vaccinated.

All vaccines have a small chance of complications. The diseases they prevent have much higher rates of complication, maiming, and death.

Maybe one of the things that pisses me off about anti-vaxxers is that almost all of them are my generation or younger, they had the benefits of vaccines because their parents remembered friends and neighbors dying of now-preventable illness. But they deny those protections to their kids, and their larger society. It's despicable, not in the least because it's other people who suffer and might even be maimed or killed by their stupidity and ignorance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vicsage View Post
I'll be attacked, but that's OK. I believe in getting all the needed vaccines, but I don't believe its healthy to get them all in a brief period of time. I think they should be spaces out more. I hear the reason they don't do this is not because they are trying to protect the child as quickly as possible, but they think parents are more likely to get them all if its only a few trips to the doctor.
Yes, there's a cost-benefit analysis going on there. Ideally, the kids should be tested periodically to make sure their immunity is still strong and the vaccines "took", and if they didn't, they should be re-vaccinated. Adults should be re-vaccinated and given boosters periodically throughout life as well but we really fail at that as a society. Well, tetanus boosters, which are now usually combined with diphtheria and pertussis (whooping cough) boosters but adults aren't reliable at getting that (outside of certain weirdos such as myself)

I think you're overly concerned (absent an actual medical problem in your kids) but as long as they're vaccinated before going off to first grade the hazard is probably minimal in a First World nation, or even in the US (which in my opinion does not have a First World level of public health) but if you take them on a trip to somewhere a little less advanced I'd get them all caught up on the vaccines pronto.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vicsage View Post
Don't think the human immune system evolved to produce 5 different antibodies in 1 day.
Yeah, actually the human immune system DID evolve to cope with a LOT more than a mere 5 different antibodies a day. It does such a good job we're not even aware of how many pathogens the body fights off daily with nary a symptom - until we have to suppress a person's immune system for something like a bone transplant.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vicsage View Post
Being called "not screamingly irrational" is one of the nicest things I've been called. Just speculation, although I had a dog once get some sort of auto-immune disease shortly after being given a large # of vaccines. Dog recovered, but the Vet suggested spacing them the next time and not giving him ones that were he was unlikely to need. Until you know for sure a little caution with no risk isn't always a bad idea.
My family is lousy with auto-immune disorders. We still all get vaccinated. I think your vet was being cautious, but honestly, if your kids had that sort of a problem you'd know by now. It's not that the vaccines are causing an auto-immune disorder, it's far more likely the disorder has been there all along and makes a reaction to a vaccine more likely.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Princhester View Post
OK, let's just give Special Snowflakes a pass. The rest of us will do the heavy lifting while they show what admirable rebels they are by not toeing the line.
Like I said, if they're getting their vaccinations by first grade it's probably OK. Personally, I have more concern about kids who get moved around a lot, in foster care (where records get lost and trying to get regular care and follow-up scheduled would be a nightmare), living in homeless shelters, they're the ones at higher risk.

Whenever I hear about anti-vaxxers going on and on about very rare complications, or complications disproven I consider my parents who made the decision to vaccinate me against smallpox (because that was still a thing back when I was a baby) despite my impressive collection of allergies and perennial eczema. They don't even allow people with a history of eczema to get smallpox vaccine anymore, much less a baby with an active case due the hazard of eczema vaccinatum. Again, these days there are treatments but back when I was a baby it was likely to be fatal. Nonetheless, I have that distinctive vaccination scare on my upper left arm. Now, obviously (because I'm here) that didn't happen, but as recently as 50-60 years ago choosing to vaccinate a kid with a higher than normal risk of side effects, even lethal side effects, was seen as a sane choice by middle-class parents. But then, my parents were old enough to remember the news accounts of the last smallpox outbreak in the US (they weren't affected by it, but did hear of it). What killed smallpox? Vaccines and herd immunity. But hey, the anti-vaxxers don't want to hear about that.

If ever there is an outbreak of smallpox will they keep their opinions that vaccines are bad, or are they willing to see 1/3 of their kids die? (Or more - depends on the strain involved. Might 40% or 60%). Of course, if there ever IS an outbreak of smallpox there will be quarantines imposed until everyone inside is either recovered, vaccinated and immune, or dead. Based on history, that would mean about a third of those inside will die (unless they they've been vaccinated in the past 10 years, which no longer applies to most of us).

But, hey, we don't have to worry about that because of vaccines.

Unfortunately, I do have an allergy to common vaccine but I get all of them that I can get safely. I didn't just throw up my hands and say "well, that trip to the ER was freakin' scary, guess I better not ever get another vaccine, ever", because getting sick just plain sucks and can be just as dangerous (is usually MORE dangerous) than getting a vaccine.
  #59  
Old 09-02-2016, 06:22 AM
crowmanyclouds's Avatar
crowmanyclouds crowmanyclouds is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: ... hiding in my room ...
Posts: 4,465
Quote:
Originally Posted by coremelt View Post
{...} I sent her the history of Cowpox , how it became the smallpox vaccine. I have no hope she'll actually learn, but at least she can't claim "big pharma" was behind that one !
'Course not, that was "big farma"!

CMC fnord!
__________________
It has come to my attention that people are stupid.
We, the smart ones, should be coming up with plans for how to remedy this, but we're all too busy watching Battlestar Galactica. — wierdaaron
  #60  
Old 09-02-2016, 06:41 AM
Nava Nava is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Hey! I'm located! WOOOOW!
Posts: 40,347
Quote:
Originally Posted by coremelt View Post
I like my idea better. No government funded schooling, no travelling on public transport no universal healthcare (in countries that have it).
In Spain you can lose custody of your children if you refuse to get them the required vaccinations. If a child can't have them for a medical reason that goes to their medical history, but the only acceptable reasons are medical ones. Other than that, the few unvaccinated people we have are almost 100% immigrants (there are occasional pockets of very low-income-level people who haven't registered the kids or ever taken them to a doctor out of a general "don't trust the man" mindset; when these are detected, doctors are taken to them).
  #61  
Old 09-02-2016, 06:41 AM
Steophan Steophan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 8,746
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vicsage View Post
There you go. I get my kids vaccinated. It takes 2 years longer. Not good enough. Your way or the highway. Got to toe the line.
You're damn right it's not good enough. You are risking the lives of your children and anyone they meet, based on your own wilful ignorance. You've been shown in this thread the scientific evidence that it's safer to get them done according to the schedule, so you can't even claim you haven't seen it - you are deliberately trying to ignore it.

If I were king of the universe, people like you would have your children taken from you, and be sterilized for the good of the species.
  #62  
Old 09-02-2016, 06:50 AM
Nava Nava is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Hey! I'm located! WOOOOW!
Posts: 40,347
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vicsage View Post
Don't think the human immune system evolved to produce 5 different antibodies in 1 day.
Not 5, hundreds. Any immune system, from any living being that has one, contains and produces hundreds of antibodies constantly.

It's not a factory with a single production line; each single antibody-producing cell can be making several at the same time.
  #63  
Old 09-02-2016, 07:12 AM
Quartz's Avatar
Quartz Quartz is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Home of the haggis
Posts: 30,370
Quote:
Originally Posted by Princhester View Post
Sort of.
Not 'sort of' at all. I live in the UK, remember? Wakefield's claims were headline news as was the fallout. Here's a story from 2013 about one parent's experiences in 1998.

Quote:
It is difficult now in 2013, to perhaps appreciate the frenzy of stories, speculation and conjecture that surrounded the original MMR scare back in 1998. My son's MMR vaccination was due at around 12 months; just as the Andrew Wakefield scare unfolded.
Quote:
Instead, I took my son to France to be vaccinated with a single measles jab. It seems ridiculous now; in the aftermath of the Wakefield report any single doses of vaccine were unavailable and I was unable at the time to find an independent GP who would administer it. The doctor thought it ridiculous too, the scare non-existent in France.
  #64  
Old 09-02-2016, 07:33 AM
Princhester Princhester is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 14,257
I don't see how your post contradicts what I said.
  #65  
Old 09-02-2016, 07:45 AM
KarlGrenze KarlGrenze is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 6,406
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nava View Post
Not 5, hundreds. Any immune system, from any living being that has one, contains and produces hundreds of antibodies constantly.

It's not a factory with a single production line; each single antibody-producing cell can be making several at the same time.
Well, there are cells that produce only one type of antibody that is good against a specific antigen. But the body has antibody producing cells in the millions, and some antibodies are good against more than one antigen (which is a good or bad thing). And the body keeps a few cells that are really good against certain antigens around longer, as memory cells.

And it doesn't do that all in one day, but in days or weeks, which is why boosters are not given until a couple of weeks have passed, at least.
  #66  
Old 09-02-2016, 09:00 AM
Jackmannii Jackmannii is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: the extreme center
Posts: 30,945
The American Academy of Pediatrics has strengthened its stand on childhood immunization (I have bolded the important parts of its new policy statement released this week):

"The American Academy of Pediatrics...urges state governments to enact policies that will result in high immunization rates. In the policy statement, “Medical Versus Nonmedical Immunization Exemptions for Child Care and Schoo Attendance​,” published (8/29), the AAP recommends only medical exemptions be allowed for vaccine requirements for child care and school attendance...If after counseling efforts are exhausted, parents decline immunizations, the AAP says pediatricians may request that they sign a vaccine refusal form and/or seek care from a different health care provider. Unimmunized children are at risk of vaccine preventable diseases and in a practice setting also create risk of disease outbreaks in young infants and those children who medically cannot be immunized.

https://www.aap.org/en-us/about-the-...No+local+token

The AAP has belatedly recognized that more pediatricians are turning away parents who refuse to have their children vaccinated (in part to protect other vulnerable children in their practice) and that such a policy may be reasonable and necessary. As to ending all but medical exemptions for vaccination, that's going to be a tough state-to-state battle, and the path will be lined with "parental rights" babble, inane antivax claims and lawsuits. California's SB277 is safe for now, but further challenges can be expected.
  #67  
Old 09-02-2016, 09:44 AM
kaylasdad99 kaylasdad99 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 30,757
Anti-vaxxers are ignorant scumbags that kill children

I'm sorry, I just can no longer let that statement pass unchallenged.

Anti-vaxxers are ignorant scumbags WHO kill children.

Okay, better. Carry on.
  #68  
Old 09-02-2016, 09:59 AM
ticker ticker is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: London
Posts: 2,006
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaylasdad99 View Post
I'm sorry, I just can no longer let that statement pass unchallenged.

Anti-vaxxers are ignorant scumbags WHO kill children.

Okay, better. Carry on.
Is that the World Health Organization WHO or the Doctor WHO you are accusing of killing children?
  #69  
Old 09-02-2016, 10:39 AM
Vicsage Vicsage is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 388
Wow, take my kids away because I stretch out their vaccines. Sterilize me. I suppose I should be grateful I'm not put in a camp with "showers". Its comforting to know that so many people in this country believe that the state owns the children and parents are mere caretakers. Ironically, the state doesn't want to pay my, sorry it's. kids bills. The thing I don't understand is the anger people have towards people who delay or even refuse vaccinations. If your kids vaccinated then they are protected. Most of the angry people don't really give a $#$@ about the other kids. If you're worried about the fact they are getting a free ride with the herd immunity. So what? People are getting a free ride in our society with tons of stuff. I worked in an industry where people who didn't work were getting 3,4, or 5 pairs of glasses a year for free because they kept losing them. Have a low paying job, sorry you pay.
  #70  
Old 09-02-2016, 10:50 AM
Telemark's Avatar
Telemark Telemark is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Again, Titletown
Posts: 21,979
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vicsage View Post
The thing I don't understand is the anger people have towards people who delay or even refuse vaccinations. If your kids vaccinated then they are protected.
Some people are unable to get vaccinated for other health reasons or are immuno-compromised. And vaccines aren't 100% effective. So unvaccinated children put everyone at risk.

So, no, vaccinated kids aren't completely safe and yes, unvaccinated kids put others at risk.
  #71  
Old 09-02-2016, 11:24 AM
Vicsage Vicsage is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 388
Children who are not vaccinated do not put everyone at risk. They only put a very small subset of people at risk. Those for whom the vaccine did not work as intended, those who chose not to get a vaccine (who probably get what they deserve), those who are immuno-compromised, and those who can"t because of health reasons. And of course, the unvaccinated child would have to have the disease and expose the others. Granted that if more and more people refuse to vaccinate that would increase the danger. But if I could get a higher compliance rate by increasing the time interval, I think it would be wise to consider.
  #72  
Old 09-02-2016, 11:50 AM
Jackmannii Jackmannii is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: the extreme center
Posts: 30,945
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vicsage View Post
Children who are not vaccinated do not put everyone at risk. They only put a very small subset of people at risk. Those for whom the vaccine did not work as intended, those who chose not to get a vaccine (who probably get what they deserve), those who are immuno-compromised, and those who can"t because of health reasons.
I'm not sure how you've calculated this as a "very small subset".
Quote:
But if I could get a higher compliance rate by increasing the time interval, I think it would be wise to consider.
It would be "wise" if there was compelling evidence (or any evidence at all) that arbitrary delays increase safety while maintaining effectiveness of an immunization program.

But there isn't.
  #73  
Old 09-02-2016, 12:27 PM
Vicsage Vicsage is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 388
Whatever the number of people at risk, its no way near everybody. The studies that people linked me to and others that I have found, do seem to show no short term effects and the only one I found also did not find any compelling evidence of long term problems. But most of the studies were concerned that multiple vaccines must be careful not to compromise the effectiveness of each individual vaccines. A reasonable assumption (by me) was that individual vaccines, given alone would be at least as effective and possibly more. And if you want to try to force people to do things, you create resistance and mistrust. If someone wants to space them out, you don't call them stupid, call them lousy parents, say they shouldn't be allowed to have children. You instead thank them as long as they get them before school. And this fake concern people seem to spout about being concerned about other peoples children who could get sick. These are the same people who send their kids to school sick with fevers and sore throats, because the adults have to go to work. There are children in school with weakened immune systems and breathing problems that a bad cold could cause serious problems. Maybe if a parent knowingly sends their kid to school sick, they should have their kid taken away and be sterilized (the parent, not the kid).
  #74  
Old 09-02-2016, 12:30 PM
Telemark's Avatar
Telemark Telemark is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Again, Titletown
Posts: 21,979
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vicsage View Post
Whatever the number of people at risk, its no way near everybody.
No, it's only the folks most vulnerable and helpless that have to suffer.
  #75  
Old 09-02-2016, 12:55 PM
Vicsage Vicsage is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 388
My last post on this subject. I've been convinced that multiple vaccinations are the way to go. As a matter a fact, Monday I'm going to get every vaccination available. They have a human vaccine for rabies, too. Polio done, Smallpox, if I can find it. The flu shot, of course. And maybe I'll see if anyone still has last years since the mix is different Repeat all my childhood ones, just to be safe. I think they have one for a form of hepatitis. Shingles done and done Since taking so many at one time may lessen their effectiveness, I'll just repeat them in 2 weeks. After all, I've learned the human body can handle dozens of pathogens at once with no problems at all. What could go wrong? Maybe a little fever and arm soreness. Everybody should do it.
  #76  
Old 09-02-2016, 01:05 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 59,286
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vicsage View Post
My last post on this subject. I've been convinced that multiple vaccinations are the way to go. As a matter a fact, Monday I'm going to get every vaccination available. They have a human vaccine for rabies, too. Polio done, Smallpox, if I can find it. The flu shot, of course. And maybe I'll see if anyone still has last years since the mix is different Repeat all my childhood ones, just to be safe. I think they have one for a form of hepatitis. Shingles done and done Since taking so many at one time may lessen their effectiveness, I'll just repeat them in 2 weeks. After all, I've learned the human body can handle dozens of pathogens at once with no problems at all. What could go wrong? Maybe a little fever and arm soreness. Everybody should do it.
Translation: "I'm going to take everything said to a ridiculous extreme and pretend to be extremely idiotic...just to prove a point!"
  #77  
Old 09-02-2016, 01:27 PM
Monty's Avatar
Monty Monty is offline
Straight Dope Science Advisory Board
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Beijing, China
Posts: 22,346
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
Translation: "I'm going to take everything said to a ridiculous extreme and pretend to be extremely idiotic...just to prove a point!"
The thing is, I doubt Visage is pretending. Also, the point he or she is trying to prove is already proven.
  #78  
Old 09-02-2016, 01:40 PM
Chisquirrel Chisquirrel is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,297
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
snip...pretend to be extremely idiotic...snip
Deliberately ignoring scientific studies, evidence, and results, and instead choosing to do what he wants based on his "feeling", ignoring possible effects, complications, and transmission to at-risk populations...he's not pretending.
  #79  
Old 09-02-2016, 08:00 PM
RivkahChaya's Avatar
RivkahChaya RivkahChaya is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 9,924
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vicsage View Post
Don't think the human immune system evolved to produce 5 different antibodies in 1 day.
I know it's already been commented upon, but this is a really, really ignorant statement, and anyone who would make it should not be making up vaccine schedules.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackmannii View Post
The AAP has belatedly recognized that more pediatricians are turning away parents who refuse to have their children vaccinated (in part to protect other vulnerable children in their practice) and that such a policy may be reasonable and necessary. As to ending all but medical exemptions for vaccination, that's going to be a tough state-to-state battle, and the path will be lined with "parental rights" babble, inane antivax claims and lawsuits. California's SB277 is safe for now, but further challenges can be expected.
I have a cousin who is a family physician-- he treats individuals, but he likes to have whole families in his practice. He is a member of the AAP, but he thinks he gets a better picture of a child's health if he is treating everyone in their household. He is very popular, and has a waiting list to be taken in as a patient. He will not take anti-vaxxers. He will not do "alternate schedules" either, other than for children with allergies who need to minimize exposure to adjuvants or cultures. I recently had a conversation with him about this, and I hope I'm not misquoting him. Anything that sound weird about that is probably me misremembering. Bottom line-- he's a popular GP who does not take anti-vaxxers. I'm glad that he, and other doctors, are taking a stand. I have another cousin who is an orthopod. I think she's contractually obligated to do follow-up with children who are treated in the ER for fractures at the hospital she is affiliated with, but she has some people who are regular patients. I need to ask her what her stance is on unvaccinated children.
  #80  
Old 09-02-2016, 08:33 PM
ivylass ivylass is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Orlando(ish)
Posts: 21,949
I wonder what would happen to the anti-vaxxers if Big Pharma came up with a vaccine that prevented autism.

I have a Facebook friend who is in line for a new job, but ---horror of horrors---they want her to get a flu shot. She was actually asking for ways she could lie to her potential new employer to avoid it.

I just hid the post and moved on. Fortunately, she's one of those people who absolutely loathes children and will not be procreating, so at least her innocent offspring won't be affected.
  #81  
Old 09-02-2016, 09:22 PM
Trinopus Trinopus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 22,855
Quote:
Don't think the human immune system evolved to produce 5 different antibodies in 1 day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RivkahChaya View Post
I know it's already been commented upon, but this is a really, really ignorant statement, and anyone who would make it should not be making up vaccine schedules. . . .
Well, I think it's true that the human body never evolved under conditions of having blood-stream injections of concentrated killed virus parts. It's reasonable to wonder what the effects might be.

The question has been answered, by actual studies. It's been looked into, and tested, and researched. So we're okay.

But the question, on the face of it, is not a bad one.
  #82  
Old 09-02-2016, 10:59 PM
psychobunny psychobunny is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 2,611
For those who are interested in a fairly comprehensive review of the risks of multiple immunization in children in the US, this is a fairly comprehensive review although a few years old. I don't know of any data since then showing increased risk but this committee specifically looked at the risks of other infections (ie generally weakened immune system) as well as autoimmune diseases and could find no correlation. However, they concluded that letting parents vaccinate on an alternative schedule could be considered since it would overall lead to more vaccination. It's a dense read but a good one.
  #83  
Old 09-02-2016, 11:06 PM
Lobot Lobot is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: NSW, Australia
Posts: 1,793
I had all my shots as a kid, except one: whooping cough--the specialists believed it was risky due to my condition. I also had respiratory problems, and if I caught whooping cough from an unvaccinated child, I probably wasn't going to be long for this world. So I had to rely on everyone else to be responsible members of the community.

This Wakefield bullshit has set things up so that everyone thinks they get to have an opinion. It's not about individual rights--it's about the social contract. If you want the goodies that come with being in a society, you have to hold up your end of the bargain. It's basically on the same level as tax evasion.
  #84  
Old 09-03-2016, 12:12 AM
Princhester Princhester is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 14,257
Quote:
Originally Posted by ivylass View Post
I wonder what would happen to the anti-vaxxers if Big Pharma came up with a vaccine that prevented autism.
Minds blown.
  #85  
Old 09-03-2016, 01:19 AM
coremelt coremelt is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,656
Ok, sorry this thread has had far too little controversy for a pit thread. So in the attempt to inject (pun intended) some life into it I'll extend my pitting.

I pit whoever it was in the US intelligence world that authorised using a Doctor doing Vaccination rounds to gather info on the people living in Osama Bin Laden's compound in Abottabad. There has been considerable blow-back with people in the North West Frontier Provinces now refusing vaccinations as they believe (with some justification) that it could be a CIA plot. It's also lead to at least 63 aid workers being murdered on suspicions of them being spies.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2...ama-bin-laden/
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2...nation-health/
http://www.latimes.com/world/afghani...126-story.html

This cowardly bureau chief, or whoever he or she was has probably put back the elimination of Polio from the planet by 20 years. No it was almost certainly not Obama, the article above states it would have been made at a lower level than that.
It simply wasn't worth it, I'd rather have Osama Bin Laden still free than the potential cost of 100's of thousands of lives from the effect this has had on vaccination campaigns in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

I refuse to believe that with the entire resources of the US three letter agencies at their disposal that they couldn't come up with a better way to identify who was in the compound. Use a drone, light part of the compound on fire and see who comes out, try and get a maid in there who's working for you, or pay off some Pakistani police to do a doorknock. There simply had to to be a better alternative than using vaccination workers to do your dirty work.

Whatever faceless middle managers authorised this, they deserve to be forced to spend the rest of their lives volunteering in hospitals in the NWFP and they still wouldn't come anywhere near close to atoning for what they've done. Unfortunately as far as I can tell having a health worker perform espionage for you doesn't appear to be a war crime, but it is the lowest of the low, sickening and cowardly. And the US is a lesser nation for the fact that it had to stoop so low to "get Osama".

Oh and the worst part of it? It didn't even work, they used other intelligence to work out who was in the compound and never managed to obtain any DNA samples.

Last edited by coremelt; 09-03-2016 at 01:22 AM.
  #86  
Old 09-03-2016, 01:34 AM
Flyer Flyer is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Colorado
Posts: 3,220
Quote:
Originally Posted by Princhester View Post
Oh I see, you're Fighting the Man. How noble. You exposed your own children to risk of serious disease, you exposed the children who had contact with your children to risk of serious disease, and you achieved nothing of practical value.

But you sure showed those assholes who recommended to you a good and effective way to protect your family and friends! You made it clear who's boss!

What a fuckin' hero.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steophan View Post
You're damn right it's not good enough. You are risking the lives of your children and anyone they meet, based on your own wilful ignorance. You've been shown in this thread the scientific evidence that it's safer to get them done according to the schedule, so you can't even claim you haven't seen it - you are deliberately trying to ignore it.

If I were king of the universe, people like you would have your children taken from you, and be sterilized for the good of the species.
Oh boo-hoo. You got your precious feelings hurt because somebody doesn't agree that your "perfect" way is the best in all cases.

Idiots like you are guilty of letting the perfect be the enemy of the good. You would prefer that people not get vaccinated at all, if they're not going to follow your ideas.

Grow up, you worthless pieces of slime!
  #87  
Old 09-03-2016, 01:54 AM
coremelt coremelt is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,656
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyer View Post
Oh boo-hoo. You got your precious feelings hurt because somebody doesn't agree that your "perfect" way is the best in all cases.

Grow up, you worthless pieces of slime!
Sorry you're the worthless slimeball. Read the papers linked above, delaying immunisations is more dangerous for your child and other children. The CDC schedule is the consensus of thousands of pediatricians using decades of study. It's not perfect but it's a hell of a lot better than any delayed schedule you arbitrarily decide on because of your "feels".
  #88  
Old 09-03-2016, 06:15 AM
Broomstick's Avatar
Broomstick Broomstick is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NW Indiana
Posts: 27,550
Yeah, a delayed schedule is a bad thing - but I'm much more concerned about the kids who won't be vaccinated at all than the ones getting delayed shots. There's bad and then there's worse.
  #89  
Old 09-03-2016, 09:47 AM
Ale Ale is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Bangkok
Posts: 5,153
Quote:
Originally Posted by ivylass View Post
I wonder what would happen to the anti-vaxxers if Big Pharma came up with a vaccine that prevented autism.

I have a Facebook friend who is in line for a new job, but ---horror of horrors---they want her to get a flu shot. She was actually asking for ways she could lie to her potential new employer to avoid it.

I just hid the post and moved on. Fortunately, she's one of those people who absolutely loathes children and will not be procreating, so at least her innocent offspring won't be affected.
That's easy, they'd blame Big PharmaTM of deliberately causing autism in children so that later on they could profit from selling a cure.
You, know, just like they created HIV.
  #90  
Old 09-03-2016, 10:02 AM
Princhester Princhester is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 14,257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyer View Post
Oh boo-hoo. You got your precious feelings hurt because somebody doesn't agree that your "perfect" way is the best in all cases.

Idiots like you are guilty of letting the perfect be the enemy of the good. You would prefer that people not get vaccinated at all, if they're not going to follow your ideas.

Grow up, you worthless pieces of slime!
You're not very good at this, are you? I mean, your invective is fine. It's just that your comprehension is so low you have no idea what invective to use on what occasion. You just learned off some stuff and chuck it out at random.

You're like a guy who's learned off the perfect funeral eulogy, but is so tone deaf he delivers it at weddings, birthday parties and Xmas parties.
  #91  
Old 09-03-2016, 10:20 AM
Quartz's Avatar
Quartz Quartz is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Home of the haggis
Posts: 30,370
Quote:
Originally Posted by Princhester View Post
I don't see how your post contradicts what I said.
You asserted that the individual vaccinations became popular only after Wakefield was debunked. I have told you my own recollections that this is not correct, and given a link to an article about someone else's memories which again demonstrate that you are not correct.
  #92  
Old 09-03-2016, 10:26 AM
Jackmannii Jackmannii is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: the extreme center
Posts: 30,945
Quote:
Originally Posted by coremelt View Post
Let's not be facetious, in western developed countries the incidence of deadly diseases is pretty low.
I was under the impression that the incidence of vaccine-preventable diseases is so low because kids are getting vaccinated on schedule.

I am certainly not linking you with antivaxers, but one of their most "eloquent" arguments against getting immunized is that "gee, these diseases are so rare, why do my kids need to get the shots?".
  #93  
Old 09-03-2016, 11:19 AM
WhyNot WhyNot is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Sweet Home Chicago
Posts: 33,500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vicsage View Post
Whatever the number of people at risk, its no way near everybody.
It is everybody. Every single body. Because no vaccine is 100% effective. So even if my measles vaccination worked perfectly, and I've developed the maximum immunity possible, I can still get measles. I probably won't, but I still can, if exposed to the virus. So your choice is putting the unvaccinated at risk, the delayed vaccinators at risk, the can't be vaccinated at risk, the failed vaccinated at risk and the fully vaccinated at risk. That's literally every single person.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Broomstick View Post
Yeah, a delayed schedule is a bad thing - but I'm much more concerned about the kids who won't be vaccinated at all than the ones getting delayed shots. There's bad and then there's worse.
This is also true. I'm not going to fight the delayed vaccinators as hard as the antivaxxers. But I do want them to be aware of the increased risks, not just to others, but to themselves, and not just from the vaccine preventable illness, but the risk of seizures that we know is associated with delayed vaccination.

If they don't know that, then it's one of those decisions that seems fairly reasonable. If they know that and still choose to delay, well, then, we know what kind of people they are.
  #94  
Old 09-03-2016, 11:25 AM
Amateur Barbarian Amateur Barbarian is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: F.O.S.O.N.E.
Posts: 19,904
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ale View Post
That's easy, they'd blame Big PharmaTM of deliberately causing autism in children so that later on they could profit from selling a cure.
A pharma cure would have generated revenues in the hundred-billions in the last decade; exactly what are they waiting for?

(There's only one effective "cure" for autism - EIBI/EIBT - and it's nothing Big Pharma can package and sell or profit from in any way.)
  #95  
Old 09-03-2016, 12:01 PM
Ale Ale is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Bangkok
Posts: 5,153
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amateur Barbarian View Post
A pharma cure would have generated revenues in the hundred-billions in the last decade; exactly what are they waiting for?

(There's only one effective "cure" for autism - EIBI/EIBT - and it's nothing Big Pharma can package and sell or profit from in any way.)
The problem is that your argument is logical and reasonable, two things anti-vaxxers have proven to be militantly impervious to.
  #96  
Old 09-03-2016, 12:14 PM
eclectic wench eclectic wench is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,644
My mother was born and grew up in a Third World country in the 1940s. She is fanatical about vaccines, because she's seen what life is like without them. My first kid got her MMR a few weeks after her first birthday (the recommended age here is 12-13 months, she had a fever one week, we couldn't make the weekly shot slot the next) and my mother could not believe that we hadn't got her down to the doctor the day she turned one. This is a kid who wasn't in a creche or playgroup, wasn't being exposed to a lot of other kids, no measles or mumps around, and yet my mother was made incredibly nervous by the idea of her being vaccinated even a few weeks after the first possible instant. That's what seeing the diseases in action will do to you.

Vaccine delayers don't bother me anywhere NEAR as much as non-vaxxers. Just mathematically, say the average lifespan is 80: someone unvaccinated spends anywhere up to an extra 79 years and 10 months as a potential illness victim and vector. A kid who gets the shot three months late spends three extra months as a possible victim/vector (and it's possible that the parents wouldn't have vaccinated him at all if the delayed schedule wasn't available). It's not great, but it's not at all the same thing, and getting equally infuriated about both is just plain silly.
  #97  
Old 09-03-2016, 12:22 PM
dropzone's Avatar
dropzone dropzone is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Cloud Cuckoo Land
Posts: 29,125
I don't understand the value of individual inoculations. Apparently, the point is that kids do not get exposed to foreign bacteria all at once, except they do all the time. People don't think about just how many they are exposed to when Mommy and Daddy breathe on them, Fido licks them, or--God forbid--they crawl on the floor. A shot of MMR is nothing like a walk in the park, especially if you put the kid down on the ground. Dozens or hundreds of exposures, all at once.
  #98  
Old 09-03-2016, 12:40 PM
dropzone's Avatar
dropzone dropzone is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Cloud Cuckoo Land
Posts: 29,125
Quote:
Originally Posted by eclectic wench View Post
My mother was born and grew up in a Third World country in the 1940s. She is fanatical about vaccines, because she's seen what life is like without them.
I was born in the US in the 50s, and as far as vaccines were concerned it was still a Third World country. We had shots for tetanus and smallpox and I was just in time for polio, but I got immunized for measles, mumps, rubella, chickenpox, whooping cough, and I think diphtheria the Third World way. And I wasn't even "sickly," just a normal kid.

As mentioned above, anti-vax sentiment seems to arise in people who have benefited from vaccinations so they never got those diseases.
  #99  
Old 09-03-2016, 12:47 PM
Amateur Barbarian Amateur Barbarian is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: F.O.S.O.N.E.
Posts: 19,904
Quote:
Originally Posted by dropzone View Post
I don't understand the value of individual inoculations. Apparently, the point is that kids do not get exposed to foreign bacteria all at once, except they do all the time.
If there is absolutely anything to any part of vaccination contraindications, it is, or eventually will be found to be in the massive shotgun of vaxes given in combination, especially the first few rounds. Most dog breeders, for example, strongly recommend spacing out puppy vaxes, because they've seen pups sicken and die from getting the full slate in one day.

Infant immunizations have increased considerably in the last decade or so. Conceding absolutely nothing to the anti-vax morons, I can think of no reason except convenience and cost to the medical profession not to space out infant and toddler vaxes a little bit. It seems very much to be a "can't hurt, might avoid even rare complications" sort of move.

Last edited by Amateur Barbarian; 09-03-2016 at 12:48 PM.
  #100  
Old 09-03-2016, 12:52 PM
Steophan Steophan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 8,746
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amateur Barbarian View Post
If there is absolutely anything to any part of vaccination contraindications, it is, or eventually will be found to be in the massive shotgun of vaxes given in combination, especially the first few rounds. Most dog breeders, for example, strongly recommend spacing out puppy vaxes, because they've seen pups sicken and die from getting the full slate in one day.

Infant immunizations have increased considerably in the last decade or so. Conceding absolutely nothing to the anti-vax morons, I can think of no reason except convenience and cost to the medical profession not to space out infant and toddler vaxes a little bit. It seems very much to be a "can't hurt, might avoid even rare complications" sort of move.
Yeah, it'll probably only kill a few kids. Nothing to worry about.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:01 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017