Nurses children and vaccinations, how do you feel? - page 4

I am on another forum that is very anti-vaccinations for children (or anyone for that matter), and it got me thinking how do nurses and other healthcare workers feel about vaccinations and... Read More

  1. by   Jo Dirt
    Quote from JaneyW
    Maybe, as healthcare providers, we should all be a little more aware of physiology and not let our personal opinions color the care that we give. A person cannot be 'immune' to an antibiotic. Guillain Barre can be a horrific consequence of a vaccine, but shingles is a product of the virus varicella. I agree with not giving fever reducers to a person with a common cold and a temp of 100-101, but a pt with pylenephritis who is hospitalized and has a fever that is trending up needs to get that temp controlled pronto by whatever means possible and monitored closely for that slippery sepsis slope as described before. I understand that raising the temp of the body is part of the immune response as that particular pathogen is happier and grows faster at 98.6, but a very virulent and dangerous pathogen won't be taken care of so easily. If that were the case, infectious disease would not have been such a threat to existence in the days before antibiotics and vaccines.

    A little history note: There is some compelling scientific evidence that vaccinations may have helped us win in the Revolutionary War. George Washington had troops vaccinated with cow pox vaccine even though it was controversial at the time. The Hessians and a lot of the British troops were wiped out by pox and other diseases that the American troops had immunity to via the vaccination (and being natural citizens of the continent as well, of course!).
    There is also evidence that smallpox rates were already declining before the vaccine for it was put into use.

    I heard a veterinarian say that even though the rabies vaccines may (or may not) protect your dog if they are bitten they can still carry it. Not saying people should or shouldn't vaccinate their pets for rabies but people think vaccines will "deliver" them. Vaccines are not the cure all people think they are.

    People have had it pounded in their heads they must must must vaccinate for everything and that no one can go to school or even leave the country without their vaccinations. This is not true. Also, when chidren are brought in for vaccinations the medical staff is supposed to explain the potential harm and give the parents the choice of whether to have the vaccines or not. This rarely happens.
    And it is known that every case of polio in the US since 1980 has been caused by the polio vaccine.

    If my children reach adulthood and decide they want vaccinations that will be up to them.
  2. by   P_RN
    Wow it seems I'm in the minority here. That's OK. My daughter working on her 3rd Master's at the same University had to get the MMR at age 38!
    She's gone to school there on and off since getting her BA in 91 and all her records are there. My son went to a regional campus of the same University and had to have the "shots" too. They're adults and made their own choices, but the school wouldn't let them in without vaccinations.

    I've asked around and it seems the norm here.
  3. by   whipping girl in 07
    Quote from nptobee
    I have an 11 y/o daughter. I am against this new vaccine for some strains of Human Papilloma Virus. I think I heard that Texas is requiring it now for girls aged 9-13(?). That's makes me angry. My daughter will not be getting that vaccine.
    If cervical cancer comes from HPV, then it is quite preventable. I don't like the idea of assuming that everyone will be having unprotected, early sex.
    So you are assuming your daughter will be a virgin when she gets married and so will her husband? Sounds like wishful thinking to me.

    My daughter will get the shot unless it's proven to be unsafe. I don't want her to have unprotected premarital sex either, but I can't control what her future husband does before he marries her. For that matter, I can't control what she does, only educate and pray.
    Last edit by whipping girl in 07 on Jan 9, '08 : Reason: Remove signature
  4. by   dream'n
    My two daughters will NOT be getting the Gardisil vaccine anytime soon. I prefer to wait until its been in use much longer. And as for the argument that we as a society shouldn't have to pay for others "poor" judgment, that just irritates me. Everyone in society makes health decisions at times that others find fault with. Riding a motorcycle without a helmet, driving a car without a seatbelt, being morbidly obese, smoking cigarettes, drinking excessive alcohol, not eating enough fiber, etc....To say that society should not assist those people, means that none of us are good enough for assistance. Everyone has a right to make their own health decisions, and society does not the right to judge them. Remember, those in glass houses....O.k. I will get off of my soapbox now.
  5. by   lsyorke
    "Your personal freedom should not come at your community's expense"

    Interesting quote. So you can only have "personal" freedom if everyone else agrees with what you are doing??? Quite a dichotomy there.

    Personal freedom is whatever you want it to be. You make decisions based on the information available to you, and the reliability of those sources(which these days are VERY questionable). Not based on what someone else thinks you should be doing.
  6. by   Jo Dirt
    Quote from lsyorke
    "Your personal freedom should not come at your community's expense"

    Interesting quote. So you can only have "personal" freedom if everyone else agrees with what you are doing??? Quite a dichotomy there.

    Personal freedom is whatever you want it to be. You make decisions based on the information available to you, and the reliability of those sources(which these days are VERY questionable). Not based on what someone else thinks you should be doing.
    Yea, really. You either believe in personal freedom or you don't. I honestly feel the way some people are turning we had better start working on making sure our papers are in order...
  7. by   CEG
    Well, I am a nursing student and my kids are not vaxed. I am "vaxed to the max" given my military service and nursing school. My daughter was fully vaxed until about age 1.5. My son received his 3 month shots, then we stopped.

    Why we stopped... my son has eczema related to multiple food allergies and some unknowns. I don't feel comfortable exposing him to all the ingredients and immune reactions that are in vaccines. If a piece of cheese causes a strong immune reaction from him then what will injecting monkey cells or mercury (still in vaccines BTW for those who think it isn't) do to his system? Just recently we found out one of his triggers is eggs. Glad we didn't get the flu vaccine.

    For the sake of herd immunity (yes, I understand and believe in it) I will probably have my kids vaccinated later albeit on an extremely slow schedule when they are at least 3 years old. I will skip varicella however until we know what happens when you are 60 and exposed to it again. I will also skip Gardisil until there is more info. Right now from clinical trials we know it lasts for at least 4 years- if I vaccinate my daughter at 12 and she has sex when she is 30 and is exposed to HPV we have no idea if it will still work. We also have no idea what the long term side effects are.

    Also, if the vaccines are so effective, then my kids will only make the other unvaccinated kids sick. There shouldn't be a public outcry given that the risks should be limited to the population who chooses to accept those risks. Just my .02.
  8. by   Almabella
    I have a 2 month old and we just got his 2 month shots last week. I opted to have the hep b administered at birth as well.

    However, I did not receive a flu shot while pregnant due to the preservative thimerosal. I was not comfortable being injected with mercury while pregnant. I feel comfortable exposing my baby to vaccines that do not use thimerosal as a preservative though. See the following link for more info:

    http://www.cdc.gov/nip/vacsafe/conce...-availfree.htm

    As for future flu shots: there are thimerosal free flu shots available every year. This year the individual doses (not the multi dose vial) by aventis pasteur were thimerosal free--this is what I would choose for my child.

    I'm still unsure as to whether or not I will vaccinate against varicella. I'm not sure the benefits outweigh the risks.

    I live in an area with a large number of immigrants, not all of which come into this country legally. They may carry preventable disease with them (please do not interpret this as anti-immigrant). I choose to vaccinate my child against deadly, preventable diseases. I believe it is foolish not to and encourage all of my patients to do the same.
  9. by   GardenDove
    Wow, I'm gratified to see so many fellow medical heretics out there. Has anyone read that book, btw? It was written by the late Dr Mendleson and titled Confessions of medical heretic





    http://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Me.../dp/0809241315
    Last edit by GardenDove on Feb 17, '07
  10. by   Rabid Badger
    Quote from CEG

    Also, if the vaccines are so effective, then my kids will only make the other unvaccinated kids sick. There shouldn't be a public outcry given that the risks should be limited to the population who chooses to accept those risks. Just my .02.

    This is untrue. Since no vaccine is 100% effective, there is about 10-30% of vaccinated individuals who did not seroconvert. This is why herd immunity is so important. When you do not vaccinate, you risk not only exposing yourself and your loved ones to the illness, all others who have not been vaccinated, PLUS those 10-30% of vaccinated individuals who did not seroconvert, who depend on the 80% herd immunity to protect them. In addition, you are also potentiall exposing individuals who are either too young, too old, or too immunocompromised to be able to receive the vaccine or to safely seroconvert.

    This is why there is a public outcry. You are not only risking those who have made informed consent to refuse the vaccine, but plenty of others who are unaware or unable to protect themselves. Herd immunity for a number of diseases which had been virtually eradicated due to vaccines are now sitting at 60%. This makes the population ripe for an outbreak, and there has been recent evidence to prove this given outbreaks of measles, whooping cough and assorted other goodies that have been unheard of for the last many many years.

    Just because it is a rare contagious disease does not mean it won't be tomorrow, especially with the especially tenuous herd immunity rates according to US and Canadian Vaccinating monitoring agencies.
  11. by   GardenDove
    You don't have vaccination rates of 60% because of consiencious objection.

    I just want to point out: Those who opt out of vaccines for their children oftentimes don't do so because of potential immediate side effects. They are concerned about the long term effects on the immune system, some of the additives in the vaccines that could cause neurological damage, and the fact that some vaccines are derived from ingredients obtain from aborted fetuses. Those are the main reasons I've heard.

    My personal concern is that the manipulation of the immune system leaves it in a state of confusion and disorder, leading to the unavailablity of immune response for common illnesseses, or an incorrect response leading to auto immune disorders and allergies.
  12. by   hollyvk
    Quote from motorcycle mama
    My nephew had the vaccine for mumps (had all his vaccines and on time) and he still came down with a nasty case of it.

    And for us people who are too uneducated and irresponsible to vaccinate themselves for community health's sake, well, if your vaccinations do what they are supposed to do you shouldn't have anything to worry about.
    What I am advocating for is that folks make INFORMED decisions. The whole landscape of preventable diseases has changed with the advent of immunizations in the past 60+ years. We've managed to elimminate smallpox worldwide--that's a HUGE victory given its lethal consequences and one that could not be accomplished without high vaccinations rates.

    When folks choose to opt out of being vaccinated they usually do so for personal health/belief reasons; what they generally do not do is evaluate their risk of contracting the disease nor consider the size of the pool of other non-immunized persons they are choosing to join that will constitue a host population for the continuation of that particular disease organism.

    Take for example pertussis (whooping cough). Infants don't have full protection against it until they've completed the DPT series at around 6 months of age. While it is a serious disease in infants (can be fatal), it is a milder respiratory infection in teenagers and adult. Worldwide, there are 30-50 million pertussis cases and about 300,000 deaths per year (World Health Organization data). Immunity after immunization can wane, resulting in outbreaks, and booster immunization has recently been introduced.

    New parents contemplating opting out of DPT for their infant would need to evaluate the risks of receiving the vaccine versus the risk of the infant becoming infected with this organism; factors to consider include: the fact that pertussis is endemic in the US, that outbreaks of it occur on a regular basis (it's a highly infectious disease), that immunity wanes over time resulting in an increase in the pool of teens and adult who can contract and spread the disease, and that treatment of the infection is largely supportive therapy (the coughing spasms last for wks and cause vomitting of stomach contents, hypoxia, and ugly cyanosis in infants).

    So if you live in an isolated area, work at home, shop by mail, and home school your kids, you've reduced the number of potential infectious contacts for your infant with this disease. But if you live in an urban or suburban area, or your children attend a school, or you frequent stores to do your shopping, it's easy for this disease to reach your infant.

    And if you've taken offense at my stance that you fully evaluate both the basis and the consequences of your decisions, then I hope that at least your anger has made you think about it a bit more deeply. Many vaccines do not confer life-long immunity, but may result in a milder infection. So I assume motorcycle mama that your nephew is neither deaf nor sterile . . . .

    Hollyvk, RN, BSN, JD
  13. by   hollyvk
    Quote from lsyorke
    "Your personal freedom should not come at your community's expense"

    Interesting quote. So you can only have "personal" freedom if everyone else agrees with what you are doing??? Quite a dichotomy there.

    Personal freedom is whatever you want it to be. You make decisions based on the information available to you, and the reliability of those sources(which these days are VERY questionable). Not based on what someone else thinks you should be doing.
    [S]Your personal freedom should not come at your community's expense[/S]
    The point of my comment was to spark discussion (which it certainly has done).

    In this country you have the freedom to opt out of vaccination schemes (perhaps not true elsewhere).

    In this country you have the freedom to travel where ever you want (but take your passport if you're crossing the border).

    In this country you have the freedom to live where you want.

    But that doesn't mean you can drive at 100 miles per hour (traffic laws), or turn your front yard into a used car sales lot (zoning laws), or paint your house purple (home owners' association rules).

    Does your community bear the costs of individuals' personal choice decisions that have bad consequences--absolutely! Our society has decided that expense is the cost of freedom here (and we have more personal freedom in this country than almost anywhere else in the world, something that most people take for granted here because they don't travel much). However, over time our community views on some freedoms are changing (e.g., seat belt use, second hand smoke exposure).

    We do have public health laws on the books which could be implemented should there be a serious, rapidly-communicable disease epidemic: people could be quarentined in their homes, in hospitals, or other holding facilities, the use of mass transit could be curtailed, treatments could be mandated . . .

    Hollyvk RN, BSN, JD

close