Rare for me, but a firm “what she said” to Valerie over at Home Education Magazine on the recent firestorm over vaccines and homeschoolers. Her conclusion, backed up with nifty graphs and summaries:
In any case, homeschooling is not the cause of the choice to not vaccinate. That cause, in the noted cases, is an objection to vaccination.
Case in point: here, we are up in arms about 131 cases of measles. In Canada, it is mumps with 116 confirmed cases. Traced not to homeschoolers, but to the Netherlands Reformed community. Who, as it turns out, also seems to have been responsible for outbreaks of measles and rubella, outbreaks which were perhaps more dangerous because the students attended their own private school, thus contributing to a quicker rate of transmission. And I wonder, if we are concerned about partial coverage of vaccines…wait…this news is somewhat older, May of ‘07, but anyone born between 1970 and 1992 are at risk because the triple MMR has been shown to not provide enough coverage for some people? That covers most of the vaccine’s thirty year history! But I digress.
Anyway, if we are concerned about the the partial coverage of vaccines and the small percentage of vaccinated children and adults who can contract one of these diseases despite two rounds of the injections, I would think the greatest concern would not be among homeschoolers, but among those populations who reject for whatever reason and send their children to school.
It is a topic I have been thinking a lot about recently, and I have even pondered just keeping my opinion to myself because I got somewhat tired of the emails I received after first discussing my daughter’s ulcerative colitis. I have always supported a parent’s right to make decisions regarding prevantative health, and any time I have mentioned vaccines on this blog I have argued against government mandates.
But I am quickly learning that not all people have that view, and it is not only those who trust the government to make better decisions regarding the health of my children. After that entry on my daughter’s ulcerative colitis, I was inundated by emails. Most were supportive. Even most of those which encouraged me to look at this or that alternative treatment were generally supportive.
But I also got my fair share of “You call yourself a Christian, yet…” My faith, my parenting and my intellectual abilities were all called into questioned by an impassioned few who thought that my decision to follow the doctor’s recommendations was evidence of trusting man over God, science over faith. It was a bit of a shock and I composed more than a few responses which vented all my frustration over my daughter’s chronic illness at these new “enemies” who were a little more tangible to me than the disease my daughter suffers from. I did not have a lot of nice things to say, but at least I did not hit “send” on any of them.
Ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s are not well-understood, but the best model at the moment contends that it is an overactive immune system attacking its own internal organs. Medications, such as steroid treatments, which suppress the immune system can bring the disease under control and put it back into remission. Mouse was on these medications for a very short time and most of that was the tapering off period. Yes, I read all the side effects. Yes, it made me a bit nervous when I received two phone calls from the nurse emphasizing the fact that should my daughter end up in the emergency room with suicidal or murderous thoughts, they were under no circumstances to take her off the medications or the situation would get worse. I completely understand why parents look at that and say, “No way!”
Funny thing is, my daughter’s emotional frenzy we had been attempting to cope with prior to her diagnosis completely levelled out within a week of beginning the medications. It was like we suddenly had our daughter back.
But this brings me back to the vaccine issue. While on these medications, Mouse could not receive vaccinations, nor could she be around unvaccinated children. Nor could she be around sick children because her weakened immune system might not be able to fight off an infection. At first, I was relieved she was not in school. After all, I wouldn’t have to worry about any and everything being passed around in her school. But then I started realizing just how big this “pocket” of unvaccinated children is among homeschoolers.
That, I suppose, is why I stuck so long on this statement by Jennifer Margulis which Spunky selected for her post:
“People say, ‘You’re putting my kid at risk, but that doesn’t make any sense at all,’” she said. “If the vaccine works, I’m just putting my child at risk.” MSNBC
But it isn’t true. Like I said, I respect the rights of parents to make these decisions for their own children, but we need to make these decisions and the resulting public arguments based on truth. If that is the result of her own research, I am not all that impressed. Her children aren’t the only ones put at risk. My daughter is at least some of the time, and many more thousands of children are as well. These numbers from the article stuck with me:
In the first seven months of this year, 131 cases of measles were reported to the CDC, compared to 42 cases in all of last year. Of that total, 112 were unvaccinated or had unknown vaccination status, the CDC said. Some were too young for vaccination, but in 63 of those cases the patient or their parents had refused the shots.
112 were unvaccinated or had unknown vaccination status.
63 of those refused the vaccination.
That leaves 49 measles cases in unvaccinated people who did not refuse vaccinations. Do they all fall into this “too young” demographic? Or how many could not tolerate vaccines due to health issues, medications or a prior history of problems with vaccines?
And should my daughter have another flare up and should we again opt for the steroid treatment which worked so well for her, do we ask Sunday School teachers and homeschool groups about the vaccination status of the children in their care? Or do we just stay home from church and other social gatherings as well?
Principled Discovery is a place to stop and discuss news and information related to faith, family and particularly education. Pour yourself a cup of tea and join the conversation! 
Dana,
First, I am sorry that when you learned of your daughter’s chronic illness you had to face people who were not supportive of your well thought out and researched decision. I don’t talk alot about how I manage Marissa’s mental health because I don’t want to open myself up to the Christian community. It is rather isolating that those who you would wish to support and pray for you are instead separated by the judgmental attitude of some Christians.
The issue of vaccinations has been on my mind for sometime now. As you know, two of my children are adopted from Haiti. The article you linked to says parents who have chosen not to vaccinate their children, “may want to exercise caution if their children express a wish to travel outside the United States, and to take care if they know of another unvaccinated child who has traveled abroad.” Diseases that are rare in the US are common in some third world countries.
One of my children carries a virus against which most children in the US are vaccinated. In fact, the current standard of care is for infants to get the first of this series of vaccinations before leaving the hospital. But, in the homeschooling community where I live there is a pocket of children who are not vaccinated. We come into contact with these children through homeschool related events.
Do I disclose my daughter’s status to other parents and put her at risk of being socially isolated? Knowing that the virus is not casually transmitted and that 1 in 20 Americans are infected, do I keep private? I mean with the rate of infection, anyone is likely to come into contact with an infected individual in the grocery store, at their dentist’s office or at a restaurant. Do I trust that parents who have chosen not to vaccinate their children are diligent about teaching their children to use universal precautions ~ you know if its wet and its not yours, don’t touch it unless you are gloved… wash your hands, etc. Luckily, the child who is infected is not my biter.
Haven’t read the whole post yet - BUT - I just had a baby this week (yay!!!!) and while in the hospital I was offered a vaccination for the MMR. I took it.
That is tough, Julie. And it isn’t so much that people disagree and tell me so. I had a lot of people who objected to our decision who did so in a very loving and respectful manner and I appreciated their concern and additional information. But there were a few…
It is frustrating. As Christians, we are supposed to bear one another’s burdens, but there are the attitudes of some which make others feel it is better to remain silent.
And now there are concerns about other populations. I don’t know that this is true, it was just a casual comment by a nurse when they were asking us if we wanted to vaccinate our newborn against Hep-B in the hospital. But when we asked why the new vaccine, she said she thought it had to do with the number of illegal immigrants in the country who were carrying the disease and/or had not been vaccinated.
That is a rather large population coming from other countries where some of these diseases are more common…many of which are no longer even endemic to the United States. And we don’t know what their vaccination status is, or the health risks they may pose. All I’m saying in that is that there is a relatively large potential for some of these diseases to gain a foothold and pose problems for a lot of children with health issues who may not be able to take vaccinations or for whom vaccinations do not work.
Heather…Yay!!!! Congratulations on your new little bundle! Are you going to post pictures? Probably too busy snuggling that new born in between trying to keep up with the other two, but we want a peek, too.
In weighing our options about vaccinating we came to understand that there were risks in not vaccinating as well as vaccinating. As the mother of a child who had an adverse reaction to a vaccine, we chose to take our chances with the disease. So to the argument that I am irresponsible for putting other children at risk I want to ask, am I called to be a steward over your child or mine? I refuse to sacrifice my child on the altar of “public good”.
I never asked you too, Amanda. If you read my entry, I explicitly stated that I support the rights of parents to make these decisions for their own children. And where did I ever make the argument that anyone is irresponsible for rejecting the vaccines?
You are inserting things into my post which simply aren’t there and I’m wondering why?
Sorry if I didn’t make it clear. I wasn’t directing those questions to you but at those arguments that were discussed in the articles you linked and in your post.
“Like I said, I respect the rights of parents to make these decisions for their own children, but we need to make these decisions and the resulting public arguments based on truth.”
That was simply my response to the “public arguments.” Too little sleep and too much coffee is not conducive to clarity!
And as a child with an adverse reaction to a vaccine, you are in exactly the population I am expressing concern for…those who should not be vaccinated, not merely those who choose not to.
You are those “others” put at risk even though the vaccines work. Some which cannot take the vaccines and some of which the vaccines do not work as well for. It isn’t just “my child” this affects as Margulis contends.
I never said that this means anyone has to vaccinate their own children. The only thing remotely close was that I would hope that people would be basing their children on truth…facts and science…not this obvious falsity that if the vaccines work, someone is only taking risks for their own children. It doesn’t take that much research to realize this isn’t the case and the public arguments regarding vaccines should really leave these sorts of non-facts out of it.
OK, that makes more sense.
I don’t think anyone is irresponsible for making an informed decision. But I do question the research of at least the one individual who stated that only her kids should be affected. That really does not take more than a little thinking to realize that there are whole groups of children who cannot be vaccinated that are at risk, many if not most of whom have weakened immune systems, meaning these diseases will be more likely to be fatal.
There is a lot of false information out there, which unfortunately leads people who support vaccinations to discredit all objections even though there are plenty of good and researched reasons to question them. It is rare that any policy can be made which will justly defend the interests of all people. And there is a lot of disrespect for the valid concerns of those who object to vaccinations not on religious reasons (ie., God can take care of my child) but on the basis of actual research. Unfortunately, there is also enough of that from the other side, as well.
“There is a lot of false information out there. . . It is rare that any policy can be made which will justly defend the interests of all people. And there is a lot of disrespect for the valid concerns . . .
I would hope that people would be basing [decisions for] their children on truth…facts and science…not this obvious falsity . . .public arguments regarding vaccines should really leave these sorts of non-facts out of it.”
Boy, this should be my all-purpose response to everything! Think it’ll fit on a t-shirt?
I’d be more willing to go along with gov’t mandates on vaccinations if those mandates were safer and more reasonable. For instance, I can see mandating vaccines for polio. Or tetanus, or diphtheria. I cannot see mandating a vaccine for chicken pox. A vaccine that does not confer the lifelong immunity that the disease gives.
The gov’t’s timetables also need to be adjusted. They vaccinate newborns. That is stupid and unsafe. I vaccinate my children, but not until age 2. The target age for diphtheria, for example, was always 3-6. I’m not going to worry about a newborn contracting diphtheria. Or tetanus. Why put their fragile little bodies at risk?
Once the gov’t starts putting forward reasonable guidelines, I will be glad to follow them.
Suburbancorrespondent, I agree completely! You know what really bothers me? The American Academy of Pediatrics approached the FDA with concerns about the vaccine schedule, recommending it be altered and vaccines used that did not contain mercury. I trust my pediatrician way more than the FDA. Why on earth should he need to go to the FDA to alter the course? With the mercury, it makes sense. The other preservatives don’t last as long and cost more, so it likely would take some sort of regulation for a switch to be made, but the whole thing bothered me.
If it is a big enough T-shirt, JJRoss. It would fit on mine, being pregnant and all.
[pats pew seat after lifting kneeler to make walking easier] You can sit next to me, Dana. ;>
This “Christian” viewpoint to eschew human medical help reminds me of a (pre-Katrina) joke.
To my mind, the stark choice between “God” or “Science” is a set-up both in constructing a straw man, and in labeling that opinion as across-the-board “Christian.” Saying that avoiding medical help is “Christian” would certainly surprise one of the deacons in our parish who is a medical doctor, as would telling him he’s not a Christian.
————-
Also, as the writer of the linked-to-piece, I base my opinion-of-caution about travel by the non-vaccinated on the experience of living overseas for roughly half my life and knowing children who have contracted diseases that I’ve not seen in the U.S. I also knew the deaf, blind and retarded child of friends of my husband, who had been born healthy but contracted a disease as an infant. The accompanying fever crippled him. I also grew up knowing about children in iron lungs because of polio (a memorable school field trip — seriously), and I had classmates with withered limbs also because of polio.
I went through having measles, mumps, rubella, and chicken pox, as did my siblings, and we all may owe our very existences to my grandfather’s stay in a field hospital in France. He sat out the WWI battles in the Seine valley while he endured the childhood diseases he hadn’t caught on the Minnesota farm of his childhood. His wartime photos are of him in a striped bathrobe standing next to a tent. For whatever that’s worth. ;>
My advice about foreign travel was not meant as a judgment, but rather just a precaution to consider in the light of simple cause and effect. Non-vaccinated persons can contract diseases if they visit a place where a disease is common. Period.
My point in the linked article — which highlighted the ‘homeschool connection’ — was not that all parents who do not vaccinate their children are irresponsible, only that:
– the non-vaccinating parents did not abstain on behalf of their children because they homeschooled (I was questioning the ‘homeschool connection’ especially in light of the 1985 report from Colorado)
– if people are not vaccinated, they might wish to reconsider their plans to travel to countries where the herd health among adults is because the diseases are still ‘childhood diseases’ that children catch … and give
Parents may very well make informed decisions to abstain from vaccination. That wasn’t my point. I was just observing that visiting other countries while unvaccinated may result in catching a disease.
We follow a selective/delayed vax schedule, and while homeschooling isn’t directly related to that decision, not having the kids in school/daycare allows us the freedom to follow a non-standard schedule.
My oldest was in a privately operated daycare center from 9 mos to 3 years and they refused to accept kids who were not fully vax unless there was a medically documented reason for it. This is perfectly legal in Massachusetts, where we were living at the time. Interestingly, this policy didn’t prevent a chicken pox outbreak at the center from occurring while my DD was there (she didn’t catch it).
I haven’t volunteered information about my 2nd’s vax status within our HS community because I don’t think it’s really anybody’s business. If my child were exposed to a disease against against which he has not been vax such as chicken pox, I would, of course, keep him at home until the incubation period was over.
Everyone focuses on unvax kids, but what about all the people of my parents’ generation who never received the vax and never contracted the disease? I found out recently that my mom never had measles or the vax against it. I suggested that she talk to her doctor about that because as she gets older, the disease could be more dangerous for her should she contract it.
Very true, Crimson Wife. And that is actually my concern with the chicken pox as well. I know that it can be quite serious in older adults and I wonder how effective the vaccine is long term? I know that if you get chicken pox when you are very young or have a mild case, you can get it again. What is the vaccine but a mild case contracted very young? I am not sure about that…it is just a concern.
Valerie, I’m not sure if the irresponsible comment came from your entry. Maybe it did…I can’t speak for Amanda, but there was a direct quote in the MSNBC article which accused those who choose not to vaccinate as irresponsible. That was what I assumed Amanda was talking about, anyway.
Fortunately, the whole God-science thing isn’t in our church, either. But then, if it were, I likely wouldn’t stay there very long.
I asked the long-term chicken pox question at my health dept last time I was there. They thought it was an interesting question and said they didn’t really know if it had even been studied, but they did know that with chicken pox, every exposure to the virus, –whether you contract the disease or not, and whether by vaccination or actual contact– gives your immune system another boost of future resistance.
Having lived and given birth in a developing nation, I second Valerie’s caution to unvaccinated persons regarding travel abroad. Polio, Hep B, and many other serious illnesses are alive and well in many parts of the world. I wonder if our generation isn’t a bit callous to the effects of these diseases since we are a couple of generations removed from most of them. I know I was shocked when I met a fifteen year old girl who lives with crippled legs and constant pain because of polio.
I saw the up and down sides of govt (and even WHO)mandated vaccination programs in Peru. The down side: My missionary friends had their school age children carry their vaccination records with them at all times because health workers would simply go to public parks, round up all the children, and vaccinate every single one with whatever they were handing out that day — no parental consent, no information about what they were being injected with, no record of whether the child had already received that vaccine. The up side: rural nurses would seek out pg women and offer them tetanus shots, because during homebirths, often whatever knife or scissors were available, clean or otherwise, would be used to cut the cord, and many women and babies died from tetanus infections contracted in this way. There was much more of an education-and-consent model, and it was fairly successful (not bad in a rural area where people don’t even believe in germs!)
I’ve read a few things in the media about vaccine-resistant strains of measles appearing. These sources seemed to blame those who choose not to vaccinate for the new strains; however, it seems to me that a vaccine resistant strain would only develop among *vaccinated* people.
I think somewhere at the core of the controversy is the idea that if we could just vaccinate *everyone*, we could completely eradicate these illnesses, as was done with smallpox.
…and that those who opt not to vaccinate are (selfishly) making it impossible to truly eliminate these diseases for future generations.
We delayed giving Tiger vaccines. We consulted his pediatrician who agreed that we should wait. He is nine now and just received his final vaccines.
JJ - Those shirts come in blue?
Hi, Dana,
Pardon me if I say that this was fascinating! Not being Christian, I never realized that among a few Christians, medical care choices are matters of religious judgement.
I do have some concerns about the number of vaccinations that very young babies are being given and the reasons for this policy. The reasons given are often that the CDC and NIH are afraid that the children won’t be given the vaccinations at all, so they give them at birth. As a biologist, I do have some concerns about the effects of multiple vaccinations on the developing immune system and on the nervous system. There is much we simply do not know yet.
There was a major increase in the number of vaccinations being given to very young children between my daughter’s birth in 1985 and the birth of my son in 1993. In 1985 the first vaccinations were recommended at 3 months whereas in 1993 they wanted to vaccinate my son immediately upon birth. Because my daughter had displayed transient neurological symptoms following her early vaccination, we opted to wait until was son was much older. One benefit of the wait is that a nursing baby receives antibodies through his mother’s milk that protect against disease and also mature the immune system.
As it turned out, it was fortunate we waited because my son has an autism spectrum disorder and of course, they were using ethyl mercury as a preservative in the batch vaccinations. Because he was vaccinated off-schedule by our pediatrician, he received single-dose vaccinations without thimerosol. Again, as a biological scientist, I find it odd that the CDC thought it was okay to inject babies with thimerosol at the same time that they had outlawed topical applications (mecurachrome and merthiolate). My son’s symptoms are mild and I cannot help but wonder what might have happened had we blindly followed the CDC recommendations.
In making our decision to delay certain important vaccinations, and refuse those we felt were still experimental (such as varicella), we took a number of factors into consideration. First, we had titers to determine if we were in fact immune to diseases that we had been vaccinated against. Secondly, we understood that day care and nursery situations were not appropriate for our son. We stayed home rather than use them both to protect our son and others. We avoided crowds.
Overall, N. was our physically healthiest child. He has had the vaccinations we think are appropriate for him. I would say that it is arrogant to judge parents who make informed decisions on these matters either way. I do not believe that it is my son’s duty to place his health at risk so that others have lower risk. But I also believe that parents of unvaccinated children should be prudent about the risks tof exposure to their child and to others.
I do not believe that mandated vaccinations and timetables are appropriate.
To me it’s all a matter of making balanced and sensible decisions for one’s own family, and of refraining from making uninformed moral judgements upon others who make different decisions based on different circumstances.
As I said, not being Christian, my eyes have been opened to another area of oneupmanship. But as the mother of a child with ASD, I get plenty of judgement thrown my way about the medications I use for him. That seems to be society-wide!
I don’t think it is specific to Christians, or religions in general. It just throws an interesting dynamic into people’s prejudices when they feel that “God says” whatever it is they believe.
I agree with you completely and have numerous concerns about the way in which vaccinations are approached in this country. Thankfully we are not herded up and randomly vaccinated like Rebecca shares from her experience in Peru!
We postponed some of the earlier vaccinations and declined the new one (Hep-B, I believe) for our baby, although she got it later. Our children have never had any sort of reaction…not even the typical fever and only very little fussiness which may have been as attributable to having their schedule messed with as to the shots.
You just think about these kinds of issues more when it is your own child, even though I still maintain that every parent needs to decide based on their children, research and pediatrician’s recommendations.
Utah State University conducted independent studies a number of years ago about the safety of vaccinations and reached the conclusion that they were safe for most children. The spokesman being interviewed did temper that finding with the statement that he was recommending that his own grandchildren not be vaccinated until the age of 2 and then to follow the prescribed schedule. He basically said vaccinating children under the age of 2 was a lot of hooey in our country where the risk is extremely low for most of the illnesses. (He may have left a couple in for babyhood–I don’t remember.) After that, he said no child should receive vaccinations without a full blood test immediately before to ensure their immune system was not compromised. It was his opinion that insurance companies should allow/seek that because there is a subset of children who can have very negative reactions, all the way from autism to death due to already-compromised immune systems.
I thought that was excellent advice, and we have more or less followed it on a more relaxed schedule fitting our daughter. He also suggested receiving fewer vacs at a time which we have also followed.
When she got her last shot a couple of weeks ago, it occurred to me that although we live in a state that does not require varicella, her probability of contracting it as a child isn’t very high because so many children are vaccinated. Personally, I think the reasons given for that vac are not in the child’s best interests in mind. If taking leave at work is a problem, that needs to be considered in the cost/benefit analysis of each family before they decide to send both parents into the workforce. (Flu is a much more prevalent cause of sick leave usage.) But the reality is that my daughter may not be exposed to chicken pox so it might be better to get the shot rather than getting exposed as an adult. We will wait a few years to see.
“That leaves 49 measles cases in unvaccinated people who did not refuse vaccinations. Do they all fall into this “too young” demographic? Or how many could not tolerate vaccines due to health issues, medications or a prior history of problems with vaccines?”
My guess would be not many fall into those categories. When Maryland threatened parents of unvaccinated students last year we saw cases where HUNDREDS of children were unvaccinated because their parents did not have the time or money for well visits and vaccinations or 4-5 hour visits to public clinics. There are other explanations.
But regardless, I don’t believe parents need to consider other children when making this decision. That is just the way it is. The whole tone of this article does try to lay some guilt on parents who don’t vaccinate by pointing out that they are risking other children.
I can flip that around and say this is the is vaccinating parents putting everyone at risk. Illness is part of life and if we get ill we develop life long immunity that can be passed on to our children while they are breastfeeding and vulnerable. Because selfish vaccinating people did not allow me to get these natural illnesses and develop real and permanent immunity my babies were at put at risk when I couldn’t pass immunity to them as nature and God intended.
If my unvaccinated kids can’t get chickenpox naturally then they are risking gettting it as adults…directly because of other’s choices to vaccinate and deny everyone the “right” to get sick and build immunity.
I’m not sure which article you are referring to in the “whole tone of the article,” but if you are referring to mine, I’m sorry but there are other children put at risk. I never said anyone had to vaccinate because of that, but as a mother of a child who this occasionally affects, I am much more aware of those who have to live with this all of the time. Certainly in the vaccine discussion there is room for all issues? And not blanket statements that aren’t even true about how not vaccinating only affects one’s own child?
There is a lot out there about “the right to get sick” but I agree with Rebecca that a lot of people have become desensetized to exactly what these diseases can and have done. Certainly, healthy children often recovered with no ill effects, but that wasn’t always the case. And isn’t always the case.
Back in 1990, we had a similar scare, but rather than 131 cases, it was over 27,000, a 51% increase over the previous year. Mose were unvaccinated or vaccinations were incomplete and over 90% of these were among those with religious or philosophical exemptions to vaccinations. Only 89 deaths, but predominantly among those unvaccinated (91%). Before vaccinations, there were over 500,000 cases per year with thousands of deaths, and of course many more diseases than measles to contend with.
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00001999.htm
Now, measles is no longer considered endemic to the United States, with most cases starting with someone who traveled overseas. Polio, too, has been virtually eradicated. As well as small pox.
Worldwide, vaccinations have led to a 2/3 decrease in measles cases and death.
I’m sure improving diet and overall health has contributed a lot to this, but deaths in children under five used to be much more commonly related to disease. Now accidents such as improper restraints during a car crash, drowning and accidental poisoning are among the leading causes of deaths for children.
Somehow, I don’t think that most parents…and probably most of us…would be terribly committed to our children’s “right” to get sick at the turn of the century when disease, complications and even death were more common and more known to people on an individual basis.
And to be a little clearer (and briefer), please realize that I understand perfectly well that you are most concerned for the health and well-being of your child. But have the same respect for me, as well. I am most concerned with my daughter’s health who can at times be at greater risk for these diseases and potential complications because of her illness.
Reacting to what you perceive as my “tone” when I clearly state that I support your right to make these decisions for your own family is not particularly helpful to the discussion.
We lived in a different world at the turn of the century. Now we have access to clean food, clean water, dependable medicine if we need it, and in generally can be much healthier if we choose too.
Many of these disseases were almost eradicated without any help from vaccines. Aussies have documented this heavily. Here is one such chart:
http://www.whale.to/vaccines/decline1.html
Other diseases were eradicated without any vaccine ever being invented, scarlet fever for instance. Was it a miracle??? No…the reasons I cited above explain it.
100 years from now I fully suspect the vaccine movement will be likened to the “bleeding” practice of old.
Doubtful. And most cases of these diseases occur in those unvaccinated. I’ve read some of their stuff, but it just does not seem to follow the data I’ve read.
And scarlet fever is bacterial, not viral. It can be treated with antibiotics which have not always been available.
Well, I don’t trust any stats given by the CDC. Government agencies have no reason to be honest with us.
It isn’t just the CDC, but if we’re going to throw out everything we disagree with, then our minds are made up in spite of any evidence. That doesn’t make a lot of sense to me.
Once almost everyone had measles as a child, and death was common. While improved health care and cleanliness certainly has benefited us greatly, it is not the only explanation. Else unvaccinated children would not contract these diseases at such significantly higher rates than those who are vaccinated. These diseases are viral and do not respond to antibiotics.
Also there are other factors to consider. Children eat far more processed foods today than a century ago, are far less active and suffer from obesity and other complications for an unhealthy lifestyle previously virtually unheard of among children. Our population is denser. Disease should travel much faster through the population.
There are risks to vaccines, but to attempt to argue that they do not work just makes no sense and really isn’t supported by science.
You ask if you should ask people’s vaccination status to decide if you want your daughter around them.
This is understandable because I have done the same thing. There are vaccines that shed live viruses and I have no desire to have my son around people recently receiving them. I’m thinking specifically of a nurse at church. I asked her to please let me know if she got the smallpox vax because if she did we would stay away for a period of time.
But how do you know if the vaccinated children’s vaxes took? That’s a common problem too. What if they got a bad batch? What if the vaccine they are trusting in didn’t do a thing for them.
There is no way to know if they are carrying something that will harm your child either.
Do people shedding viruses from recent vaxes cause concern too?
It’s not just a vaccinated/unvaccinated question because the truth is that vaccines are not 100% effective for anyone.
Yes, that is true. I don’t think anyone denies that and even in these articles there is concern about widespread rejection of vaccines in part because of the few in which vaccines don’t “”take” or only partially work.
This is only a part time issue for my daughter, but it does make you think more about those if affects all the time when it is closer to you.
Dana, I feel your concern. My daughter’s immunity is compromised occasionally as well. I actually found it a bit of a relief that we can’t give her live vaccines. The decision is made for me!
Anna, that’s funny. I sort of felt the same way. Except that she is fine most of the time. Most of the decisions have been sort of made for us…including keeping them on schedule when she is not on her meds.