Vaccination v homeopathy

[JuzaMum]

Interesting article from Australia

http://www.smh.com.au/national/health/h ... z2DVXCNbxv

Personally I think vaccination should be a choice and not forced on anyone. I had meet a few (unvaccinated) children who have had whooping cough recently and am led to believe that vaccinated children can catch it too. I have also met a number of parents who seem to have a good arguement for delaying vaccines until their child/children are older.

JuzaMum

[GeorgeSalt]

Choosing not to vaccinate or choosing to delay vaccination could be an educated choice.

"Previously, the mother had been arranging homeopathic vaccines"

Belief in fairies and foo-foo dust is something else altogether.

[gregorach]

I had meet a few (unvaccinated) children who have had whooping cough recently and am led to believe that vaccinated children can catch it too.

Yes, but the chances are much lower. Nothing is perfect.

[The Riff-Raff Element]

It is a bit of a shame that people need to be forced into getting their children vaccinated, but freedom of choice, it seems, can only be extended so far. Otherwise people might make the wrong ones

[marshlander]

We are so lucky these days in that these vaccines are freely available to our children and so sad that misinformation makes some parents decide not to immunize their children, putting their children and others at a greater risk of illness.

I'm just old enough to remember older children at school wearing calipers after being partially paralyzed by polio and all the kids in the street being sent round to visit the sick one who had German measles so they could catch it and 'get it out of the way'. I also remember children who were deaf or had learning difficulties because their mothers had not been immunized and were exposed in pregnancy to children with German measles and infected the baby. Dreadful.

I don't understand why a mother should not wan't to protect her child especially if it's an over reaction to feeling she's being forced.

[oldjerry]

[quote="marshlander"] some parents decide not to immunize their children, putting their children and others at a greater risk of illness.

When you bring the case down to the arguement that the well - being of the herd takes precedence over individual freedom , include me out.

[clare]

Always imunize.to protect your children.I always left a gap between jabs,some are given together and I felt it was overloading their little bodies,but to opt out was never an issue.my youngest had measles at 18 months and was so ill,but had she not had the mmr at 13 months would have been seriously ill .she had the booster at 5 and I know she is protected.it is those who opt out that stop the eradication of these awful diseases.childhood deaths were common in years gone for this reason ,we need to vaccinate to prevent returning to that awful time

[diggernotdreamer]

There are mothers in developing countries who would give their right arms to be able to vacinate their children and give them the chance of life. Like Marshlander, I can remember the children with the leg braces, the women who came round our house when I was small, speaking in quiet voices about whose children had whooping cough and various babies that had died of this and that. I was innoculated against smallpox as a child. Perhaps we have become complacent about these diseases that used to kill and maim so many children. I had my daughter innoculated, for her protection, I weighed up the pro's and cons and in the end it was a no brainer for me.

[KathyLauren]

I am not big on forcing people to do things. But...

Vaccination works, but only if the vast majority of people are vaccinated. When they are, those who are unvaccinated are protected by the vaccination rate of the "herd". In effect, they are benefiting from the choice of the "herd" without contributing to it.

I would be happy to "include out" of the herd anyone who doesn't get vaccinations. By all means keep them out of school, bar them from public places, etc. If we do that, then I am fine with their not getting vaccinated.

[marshlander]

some parents decide not to immunize their children, putting their children and others at a greater risk of illness.

When you bring the case down to the arguement that the well - being of the herd takes precedence over individual freedom , include me out.

Well I did say it was sad that misinformation makes some parents decide etc..... My point was knowing what we now know medically, experience of not having vaccines and the fear of my child being seriously ill or worse, how could I not vaccinate?

As to the argument about personal freedom versus 'well being of the herd' it depends. As a society we have to agree certain things for the good of all. It would be crazy for me to decide I prefer to drive on the opposite side of the road as everyone else. As long as any restriction on your personal freedom is reasonable - there's the rub of course; One person's reasonable is another's attack on their freedom.

It is my understanding that unvaccinated children could pass diseases on to babies who are too young to be immunized or anyone with a compromised immune system with devastating results. I would hope mothers would want, even fight for the right, to have their child immunized but in the end, when it comes down to it whose rights are we supposed to defend?

[oldjerry]

My kids are vaccinated against the deadly or debilitating stuff.

(Off the point,but it does make me smile when Drug companies develop new products,and simple diseases that used to require a week or two in bed suddenly become a new deadly threat.Less amusingly,children in parts of the world where the disease really is deadly, won't get it due to cost).

Anyhow,back to the point,personal freedom vs. the good of the herd.

Uk death rate of kids from measles? 20?, 25?per annum?

Number of children killed annually on British roads? 150 - 175. Most research shows this would halve (at least) if speed limits were lowered.

..... No money to be be made there though eh?.....

[The Riff-Raff Element]

Uk death rate of kids from measles? 20?, 25?per annum?

Number of children killed annually on British roads? 150 - 175. Most research shows this would halve (at least) if speed limits were lowered.

..... No money to be be made there though eh?.....

It's odd how this disparity is somehow acceptable, isn't it? Propose that speed limits are lowered to protect pedestrians and a whole section of society (mostly male - make of that what you will) rise up in fury and spout a load of crap about how "speed doesn't kill - bad driving kills" as if conservation of momentum (i.e. mass of car time x speed = mass of pedestrian times splat, with the messiness of the splat being dictated by the magnitude of the speed involved) didn't exist.

It's also odd that some many people who paint themselves as liberal are often so keen to "force" people into doing things or to advocate a ban on stuff that doesn't fit their world view or goes against the accepted science of the day. What would one call a society where science & logic are the only criteria for making decisions? A technocracy? Whatever, I don't think it would be much fun.

All that said, I think people like that woman in the article who refuse to vaccinate because they thought homoeopathy would protect her children are in cloud cuckoo land. But would I force her to do It? Would I force her ex-husband not to? They're supposed to be grown ups - the court, in my view, should have told them to grow up and sort it out like grown-ups.

[julie_lanteri]

it is an important decision to make as a parent. Unfortunately, all the info you find is "vaccinate or your child might die" type thing. Rarely "10 years on, only 25% are still protected". And I'm not even talking about the controversies following each new vaccine. true or false? who knows, it's always put down to coincidence...
By vaccinating everyone against everything, are we not just lowering our natural immune system?

So NO, it's not a no brainer as far as I'm concerned. I'm looking at my 3 month-old little man right now, trying to do the right thing... He had the first 2 jabs at 8 weeks but we didn't do the Men C at 12 weeks. Maybe we'll do it later, maybe not, MMR when we come to it? probably not. He's strong and healthy and I want to keep it that way. Don't we say feed the soil and grow healthy/hardy plants rather spray plants with fertilisers and pesticides? (sorry about the simplistic analogy)

On the other hand, I'm no hippy/cuckoolander and I do understand the need to protect the ones who would really be at risk. I would be more than willing to vaccinate him if he was in contact with someone with low immunity (play group or school for eg). Also in his teens against mumps if he hasn't had it yet. I'm not talking about pregnancy as I see it as a woman's responsibility to protect herself and her future baby: all it takes is a blood test and vaccine BEFORE getting pregnant (yes, needs a bit of planning...)

Anyway, just my two cents on the subject

ps: don't throw stones at me, my son is breastfed, he needs me ;o)

[Crickleymal]

By vaccinating everyone against everything, are we not just lowering our natural immune system?

No of course you aren't lowering your immune system. Exactly the opposite in fact. You are forcing your immune system to generate antibodies to the disease, exactly as if you had been exposed to it but with little or no risk.

Having said that I caught whooping cough last year and I have been vaccinated against it. Mind you, I was vaccinated as a child and I am nearly 50. So exactly how long vaccinations remain effective for is up for debate. I would imagine though that they will protect the most vunerable for the period that they are the most vunerable.

[GeorgeSalt]

it is an important decision to make as a parent. Unfortunately, all the info you find is "vaccinate or your child might die" type thing. Rarely "10 years on, only 25% are still protected". And I'm not even talking about the controversies following each new vaccine. true or false? who knows, it's always put down to coincidence...

But how many who are vaccinated have protection during their early years when they are least likely to be able to fight off an infection themselves? A teenager has a stronger immune system, and is generally just more resilient to many diseases that can be fatal for infants - and are regularly fatal for infants in areas where they are prevelant.