Nurses children and vaccinations, how do you feel? - page 5

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   lsyorke
    Quote from GardenDove
    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.
    This is my concern also. Take Gardisal...barely out of clinical trial(with some neurological side effects showing up there), yet in Texas they are going to mandate it's use, regardless of what pediatricians have said about waiting for more information about risks.
    My son is immunized(he's 19) but I would have think long and hard if I had an infant today.
  2. by   ann945n
    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.
    Just to clarify you can get HPV from having protected sex, as most people get it that way. Getting HPV now is just a sign of sexual activity. Ive heard that upwards of 80 percent of females will be infected in their lifetime and every women I have asked has reported to me they too have once tested positive for HPV including me my mom my best friend most women in my RN class and so on.... Luckily none of us got cancer, though my mother came close. HPV vaccine is a wonderful options that all young women should be informed about and have the option to get if they so please. I will be getting it soon myself.
  3. by   Jo Dirt
    Quote from hollyvk
    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
    Who is angry ?

    I agree people should make INFORMED decisions and not simply parrot what scientists hired by pharmaceutical companies and the government that received money from the pharma companies tell us.
    But most often parents are not given the choice to make informed decisions, because even though it is supposed to be the law that possible side effects and dangers are mentioned to the family (which are very real) it most never happens. If it is mentioned at all it's usually that the benefits outweigh the risks and that's the end of it. Unfortunately, most people put blind faith in doctors.

    And if my nephew is not sterile or blind I doubt it is because he was vaccinated.

    Also, smallpox was already declining before the vaccine came into use. Diseases tend to run a natural course.

    So, I am informed. Thank you for the genuine concern.
  4. by   Angie O'Plasty
    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.
    I feel the same way about this one. I can see where from a public health standpoint it may help, since there will always be those who continue to have early unprotected sex. However, as you said, HPV is quite preventable without the vaccine. At my last physical, I was offered the HPV vaccine but did not take it--why would I need to take it if I'm going to wait until I'm married to have sex? Totally unnecessary and I'd rather not be the guinea pig for such a new vaccine. Like many of you, I am generally pro-vaccination but am leery of the newer ones until they have been out a while and shown to be safe and effective.
  5. by   Angie O'Plasty
    Quote from GardenDove
    ... the fact that some vaccines are derived from ingredients obtain from aborted fetuses.
    I didn't realize that--which ones?
  6. by   hollyvk
    Quote from Angie O'Plasty
    I feel the same way about this one. I can see where from a public health standpoint it may help, since there will always be those who continue to have early unprotected sex. However, as you said, HPV is quite preventable without the vaccine. At my last physical, I was offered the HPV vaccine but did not take it--why would I need to take it if I'm going to wait until I'm married to have sex? Totally unnecessary and I'd rather not be the guinea pig for such a new vaccine. Like many of you, I am generally pro-vaccination but am leery of the newer ones until they have been out a while and shown to be safe and effective.
    Angie,

    I think it's hugely admirable that you have chosen not to be sexually active until you are married. Are you planning on having your future husband tested for all possible STDs and at regular intervals thereafter? (Something I hope Mrs. Ted Haggard will require of her hubby).

    Vaccine safety is a very valid issue, and yes, there is reason to question whether the decision made in Texas to vaccinate all pre-teen girls against HPV is motivated by just public health concerns or by profit-driven lobbying by the vaccine manufacturer.

    HollyVK RN, BSN, JD
  7. by   Angie O'Plasty
    Quote from hollyvk
    Angie,

    I think it's hugely admirable that you have chosen not to be sexually active until you are married. Are you planning on having your future husband tested for all possible STDs and at regular intervals thereafter? (Something I hope Mrs. Ted Haggard will require of her hubby).

    Vaccine safety is a very valid issue, and yes, there is reason to question whether the decision made in Texas to vaccinate all pre-teen girls against HPV is motivated by just public health concerns or by profit-driven lobbying by the vaccine manufacturer.

    HollyVK RN, BSN, JD
    Well, hopefully he will also be someone who has chosen to save sex for marriage, and in that case the testing wouldn't be necessary, but if he has ever been sexually active it would certainly be advisable to make sure he didn't pick anything up then.
  8. by   GardenDove
    Quote from Angie O'Plasty
    I didn't realize that--which ones?
    It sounds like from this that rubella is a biggie.

    http://www.catholic.org/featured/headline.php?ID=2410

    http://www.vaccinationnews.com/daily...omAborted4.htm
  9. by   lsyorke
    Quote from motorcycle mama
    I agree people should make INFORMED decisions and not simply parrot what scientists hired by pharmaceutical companies and the government that received money from the pharma companies tell us.
    But most often parents are not given the choice to make informed decisions, because even though it is supposed to be the law that possible side effects and dangers are mentioned to the family (which are very real) it most never happens. If it is mentioned at all it's usually that the benefits outweigh the risks and that's the end of it. Unfortunately, most people put blind faith in doctors.
    My feelings in a nutshell!!! As you can tell I have a healthy mistrust of the Pharmaceutical industry right now.
  10. by   GardenDove
    Quote from lsyorke
    My feelings in a nutshell!!! As you can tell I have a healthy mistrust of the Pharmaceutical industry right now.
    AMEN! They are corporate America with profit motive as their prime motive. Their first obligation is to their stockholders.
  11. by   Quickbeam
    I look at the vaccination question through the eyes of an old timer....I only got polio vaccine and then proceeded to get every other childhood disease. I would not wish them on anyone. I think it is amazing that children no longer have to get mumps or chicken pox. They are both dreadful.

    In my 10 years working pediatrics, I saw thousands of children with whooping cough, chicken pox and mumps. The parents always said the same thing: "we didn't think those diseases were around anymore....didn't seem any reason to vaccinate".

    My cousin's son got whooping cough at 10 and has some serious disabilities from it. My cousin thought he'd be safe because "everyone else was vaccinated".

    Vaccinate/don't vaccinate....I think it should be a parent's choice. I just hope it is an informed choice.
  12. by   hollyvk
    Quote from motorcycle mama
    Who is angry ?

    I agree people should make INFORMED decisions and not simply parrot what scientists hired by pharmaceutical companies and the government that received money from the pharma companies tell us.
    But most often parents are not given the choice to make informed decisions, because even though it is supposed to be the law that possible side effects and dangers are mentioned to the family (which are very real) it most never happens. If it is mentioned at all it's usually that the benefits outweigh the risks and that's the end of it. Unfortunately, most people put blind faith in doctors.

    And if my nephew is not sterile or blind I doubt it is because he was vaccinated.

    Also, smallpox was already declining before the vaccine came into use. Diseases tend to run a natural course.

    So, I am informed. Thank you for the genuine concern.
    Motorcycle mama: your nephew most likely was vaccinated with the current form of mumps virus vaccine, which is a live attenuated one. So it is possible that he could have developed a mild mumps infection, but this is not a common occurrence.

    Complications from mumps are rare, but can be serious including fatal viral meningitis:
    http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/mum...125/DSECTION=6
    http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/im/vpd-mev/mumps_e.html

    Mumps vaccination, like all other public health programs can be boiled down to a cost-benefit analysis: "In a cohort of 1 million people, the vaccine would prevent over 74,000 cases of mumps and 3 deaths and the cost-benefit ratio is 7.4:1." http://virology-online.com/viruses/MUMPS6.htm

    If you join the US military, you will be vaccinated if you were not previously vaccinated.
    http://www.vaccines.mil/documents/937MIP-Mumps.pdf


    Smallpox would not have disappeared without the massive efforts that went into eradicating it,
    http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/smallpox/DS00424
    http://www.who.int/csr/disease/smallpox/en/

    and it is still holds the potential of being used as a biological weapon.
    http://www.emedicine.com/emerg/topic885.htm

    The mortality rate for smallpox infection is 30% and currently only slightly more than 50% of the population in the US has been vacinated against it, so that if it were release here in an act of terrorism, the results would be disasterous.

    As concerns increased about vaccine safety and complications, Congress responded by creating the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program
    http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/
    http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/cpquer..._233345&<br />
    http://www.vaccineinfo.net/yourright...ycomplaw.shtml
    which is similar to worker's compenation for employment injuries as a mandated non-litigation program to compensate persons injuried by vaccines.

    In a perfect world there would be no disease, pestilance, war, famine, pollution, or overpopulation. Some people believe that the new deadly human diseases that seem to arise out of nowhere (e.g., HIV, Ebola) are nature's way of protecting the earth from the ravages of us humans. Something to think about--would the other species that we cohabitate this world with be better off if we were exterminated?

    HollyVK RN, BSN, JD
  13. by   Angie O'Plasty
    Great...sounds like there needs to be some work on developing alternative vaccines for that one then (at least here in the US)! Then people wouldn't be put in such a bad position of having to use a vaccine produced in a cell line derived from aborted fetuses in order to not risk serious problems in babies from their mothers contracting rubella. Either way one chooses to go, there's a moral problem.

close