There is no decision more personal than whether or not to immunize one's children. Information regarding the safety and effectiveness of today's vaccines is readily available but is overshadowed by opinion and hyperbole offered up by celebrities and others. In light of significant recent outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases all over North America, it's a good idea to explore the issues.
To immunize or not to immunize... that is the question. When I was growing up, there really wasn't any controversy - when we were in certain grades, we were all lined up at school and the public health nurse either gave us a shot in the arm or a little pink drop of sugary liquid on a plastic spoon. I have a nice, circular scar on each of my upper arms just below my shoulders that signify my immunization against smallpox, the only disease to have been declared eradicated from the Earth. When my children were small they each were given their shots according to the vaccination schedule of the time. It's what we did. Then came Andrew Wakefield.
The study published by Mr Wakefield purported to link immunizations with the development of autism and it set the world on its ear. The fact that this study has been debunked scientifically a number of times seems not to penetrate the consciousness of a growing group of parents who feel that herd immunity will protect their children. The principle of herd immunity is simple: if enough of a herd of any species is immune to a microbe the odds of an outbreak of that microbial disease are extremely low. And should an outbreak occur, it rapidly diminishes as the number of susceptible hosts drops. Well, guess what... the herd isn't immune any more.
Outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases like measles, mumps, rubella, pertussis and varicella have been documented all over complacent North America. Combined with a falling immunization rate, high-speed intercontinental travel allows these diseases to gain a toehold and then they are free to run rampant through populations with low or NO herd immunity. Communicability begins before the infected host becomes symptomatic, so spread is difficult to contain once it begins. Measles had been declared eliminated in the Americas in 2002, with small sporadic outbreaks annually; there were 85 cases on the continent in 2005 and as many as 253 in 2010. But in 2011, the WHO American region reported the highest number of cases seen since the disease was reported eliminated. My city has just recorded its second measles case in as many weeks after years of zero cases and we've had two infants with congenital rubella admitted to our PICU in recent months.
"So what's the big deal?" people say. Health care has changed since the 50s and 60s, and kids don't die of vaccine-preventable diseases any more. Right? Wrong. Children and adults DO die of these diseases, although the number is small and complication rates remain manageable. For now, at least. Even so, people still believe that it's all hype and not really anything to worry about. They forget about the children and adults who are unable to be immunized, not for lack of wanting it but because of other health issues. Children with cancer, blood dyscrasias, organ transplants and certain neurological disorders cannot be immunized against certain diseases. Adults who have been inadequately immunized as children for whatever reason are also at risk. And it's this population who are at risk for dying from chicken pox. Or measles. Or to become sterile from the mumps. Or to have a baby with severe anomalies from congenital rubella. It's not a joke.
In the course of researching my family tree I have come across entire families wiped out by pertussis and measles, and others by typhus, cholera, or scarlet fever (infections that while not vaccine preventable, have been essentially eradicated by modern-day antibiotics and sanitation practices). I'm always deeply saddened when I find them, and I fear that if the current complacency and disdain for immunization continue we may find ourselves right back there.
As pediatric nurses we have a unique opportunity to help make this better. We have many teachable moments in the course of our workday where we could reinforce the message that not only are vaccinations safe and effective, but also that parents aren't only protecting their own children, they're protecting those they encounter out in the world who aren't lucky enough to be able to protect themselves. We can remind them that no one knows what the future might bring and that someday they may find themselves with a child who can't be immunized. I remember a family that had 5 children. None of them were immunized because the mom was opposed. Their fourth child became critically ill and needed a heart transplant. The discussions with this mother were intense and, on some level vaguely threatening when it was pointed out that the child would surely die if one of the siblings brought home a vaccine-preventable disease after going through a transplant. She asked for some time to research things and in the end agreed to have all of her children immunized.
My challenge to you is to examine your own thoughts and feelings about vaccinations from a scientific rather than an emotional perspective. Then I challenge you to formulate your responses to parents who are on the fence about having their children immunized so you have them ready when the opportunity arises. Our future is counting on you.
I'm pretty sure no one has said vaccines are 100% safe. Anyone who does needs to check their facts. Medications aren't 100% safe either. Antibiotics and birth control are big ones with serious adverse reactions. ANY vaccine or medication can cause side effects in anyone. A good friend of mine died from a blood clot related to her birth control. She isn't a smoker or did not have high blood pressure or any of the other high risk issues.
Here is actual data on Vaccine compensation with # of cases filled, compensated, and dismissed per vaccine type from 1988-2014. Summary: 3,562 compensated and 9,755 dismissed. Then there is an awesome chart on doses administered from 2006 to present and number of cases filled, dismissed, and compensated for comparison. Total distributed doses: 1,968,399,297; total compensated: 1,328; total dismissed: 1,074. This means since 2006 0.0000000674% of doses administered got some form of compensation from 2006-2014.
As for the court cases with autism, the COURT determined there was a link. There is still no SCIENTIFIC proof there is a link. Furthermore the parents argued that the vaccine caused "encephalopathy....in the form of asthma and ASD" and the court agreed. And assuming that all 1,328 children above developed autism from the 1 billion doses administered it still doesn't explain the increase in ASD.
Yes, all medications have potential side effects. And if doctors are doing their jobs, both ethically and legally, they are informing their patients of the potential side effects so that patients can decide for themselves whether or not the benefits outweigh the risks. Lest we forget, patients have a right to self-determination, and parents of children have that same right to decide for their children. The difference between vaccines and other medications is that everyone recognizes and accepts that FACT about other medications, but some would strip patients of that right when it comes to vaccines if they could.
As for the stats on vaccines on the HRSA website, you have misquoted some information. There is NO data for vaccines ADMINISTERED, only data for doses DISTRIBUTED, which can be quite a difference. Doses distributed includes vaccines that go to warehouses, vaccines that expire, those dropped or have otherwise become contaminated, etc. So the number is naturally inflated with no way to know how many have actually been administered.
Further, cases that were dismissed tells me nothing since cases of ALL types are dismissed in court all the time due to a lack of evidence at the time it is presented. Some cases are re-filed when adequate evidence is available; some are dismissed because they weren't filed in the required time-frame but not because they lacked evidence; others are likely dismissed for other technical reasons. Dismissal of a case does NOT equal no injury from a vaccine in all cases.
Yes, the court made the determination in these cases. HRSA and the CDC are the last groups that one would expect to admit an injury linked to vaccines. Do you think that they have not consulted tons of doctors and scientists in these matters??? They would not admit to ANY injuries if they could get away with it (and did so for a long time), so if they can see a link between vaccines and injury, that's good enough for me.
As for the increase in autism cases, nobody is claiming that they are ALL due to vaccine injury!
Everything we do everyday has some sort of risk. You presume to go to the doctor or hospital to get better and any medication could cause a possible adverse reaction and any procedure could have a complication. Yes we get it, some people have been injured due to vaccines but they also help the majority of people.
Yup, but as stated previously, the pro-vax crowd accepts the right to self-determination for other meds, just not for vaccines. You have the right to vax and I have the right to say no. And by the way, those who choose not to vaccinate have NO DUTY to explain their rationale to ANYONE.
Yes! How do you not trust your Doctor's opinion for vaccines but you are okay with him/her prescribing your kid antibiotics and acetaminophen! I kinda get if you're anti-vax and have a herbal remedy belief for ailments and avoid the medical community. It's ridiculous to believe the "false" info about vaccines, but all other medication out there is fare game.
See, these are the kind of assumptions that irk me! Who says I trust my doctor's opinion on ANYTHING? I am a fairly intelligent person; I question EVERYTHING and then decide for myself. I may ask for my doctor's opinion on a topic, but that doesn't mean that I follow lock-step with her opinions or recommendations! I rarely do something without first getting opinions from multiple sources, as do those I know who don't vaccinate, or who don't follow traditional treatments for certain illnesses.
One of my sisters, a niece, and brother-in-law are medical doctors; the same sister and her husband are also chiropractors; another sister is an RN; a different sister is a PA; a nephew holds an MS degree in biology, and NONE of them vaccinate! Then there's myself with a BSN--hardly an illiterate bunch. I know doctors personally that I work with who do not vaccinate, and I know of many more who do not vaccinate. If vaccines are so safe and not "truly" harmful, one has to wonder why so many people in the medical field choose to NOT vaccinate THEIR children, even if they feel that they must recommend vaccines to their patients or risk being sued???
Perhaps if you did some research with a dictionary, you'd see the word vax does not pertain to vaccines or vaccination.
Everything in life carries a risk. We need to think about the risks vs. the benefits. Are vaccines 100% safe? Maybe not, but show me something that is.
I'm of the age when vaccines were new and I vividly remember lining up for the new polio vaccine. I also vividly remember the older kids in the neighbor hood who HAD polio.
Yeah, vax is not in most dictionaries. I did come across it in an online medical dictionary once but can't find it now. However, it is a commonly used and widely recognized abbreviation for vaccines or vaccinate. Also, many medical websites, including the FDA, use the abbreviation "vax" for vaccines or vaccinate. It is listed as an accepted abbreviation on the VAERS website. It is even used in referring to specific vaccines as a registered trademark, such as M-R Vax, JE Vax, ATTENUVAX, YF Vax, PEDVAX, and probably more that I'm not aware of. So please, save your condescension.
As for risks vs. benefits, I already addressed that. People have the right of self-determination and this is widely accepted for other medications, but it seems that some forget that when it comes to vaccines. You have the right to choose to vax; I have the right to choose to not vax. Period!
It never ceases to amaze me who parents choose to believe when it comes to vaccines. The propaganda spread by Andrew Wakefield was a lie meant only to advance his position and prestige. Jenny McCarthy is an uninformed celebrity and the mom of a child suffering. Of course, she wants something we can identify and blame to explain her son's illness. That is human nature. It does not mean what she says is true. You would not go to a wood cutter for heart surgery. Why do you think that celebrities and known liars know better than respected scientists, pediatricians, and our nursing colleagues? Vaccinations save lives. What one does for one's own family, is to a great extent a private matter. However, because there are some children who cannot get vaccinated due to health conditions and those for whom vaccines do not confer immunity, by decreasing the percentage of vaccinated individuals, a parent's uninformed choices may put many people at risk.
Likewise, it never ceases to amaze me that the assumption is that those who choose not to vaccinate rely on Dr. Wakefield and celebrities like Jenny McCarthy.
For the record, I am peripherally aware that the doctor and Ms. McCarthy are against vaccines and that Ms. McCarthy has an autistic child that she believes was injured by vaccines. However, I have never read anything by either of them, or any other celebrity for that matter, regarding their opinions on vaccines. Whether or not there is any truth to the assertions that they make regarding vaccines has ABSOLUTELY NO BEARING on my personal decisions on ANYTHING, let alone vaccines.
Yup, but as stated previously, the pro-vax crowd accepts the right to self-determination for other meds, just not for vaccines. You have the right to vax and I have the right to say no. And by the way, those who choose not to vaccinate have NO DUTY to explain their rationale to ANYONE.
You can make a choice not to immunize your kids against diseases. We disagree that it is a wise choice though. And you will have to accept some of the consequences of that decision. In California since January, in order to get an exemption, you have to see a medical provider who then has to explain all the things that might happen to your child if you do not immunize. Then that provider will sign the exemption once he/she thinks you are fully informed. I truly don't know if all medical providers will do this.
If your child is in public school and there is an outbreak of one of the diseases, your child may have to stay out of school until the outbreak is over. That could be weeks.
There is good science behind immunizing children and adults. You can chose to believe it or not but you can't complain about consequences. No one is immune to those. It's called real life.
It puzzles me that one learns all that is needed to be a nurse, but cannot ascribe to the science that guides our practice. If one chooses to dismiss vaccines as unimportant, even harmful, despite the abundance of hard science supporting this practice, what is next? Is there someone out there who will decide hand washing is unimportant? Or aseptic technic is unimportant. As nurses we are educated to think critically, research peer reviewed materials, and be up to date on proven treatment modalities. And above all to provide accurate information/education to our patients/clients. If you will not immunize your own child what do you tell parents when their child is diagnosed with whooping cough? Just my humble opinion, but if you cannot support the scientific principles adopted by mainstream medical practice, perhaps you should consider a different career.
AGAIN with the assumptions!
Are doctors and scientists human? Are they infallible? Doctors make mistakes all the time! I'm actually surprised (well, not that much) that nurses are so insistent that we listen to our doctors and do what they say. How many times have you seen patients that have been misdiagnosed because, frankly, the good doctor didn't have a clue what was wrong with a patient but they had to give the patient's complaint a name in order to admit??? Or, because they find "nothing" from blood tests or xrays, they dismiss a patient as having "nothing wrong?" I see this ALL THE TIME in the ER! Then there are patients who get a wrong diagnosis for YEARS, with the associated treatment, only to eventually find out (or worse, maybe not find out) that it was something entirely different! That's not to say that I expect them to have the answers for everything; just the opposite! I KNOW (and so should you) how little that mainstream medicine actually KNOWS!
Sorry to burst your bubble, but I happen to think that those who DON'T adopt mainstream medical practice--at least not all of them--are the critical thinkers!
You can make a choice not to immunize your kids against diseases. We disagree that it is a wise choice though. And you will have to accept some of the consequences of that decision. In California since January, in order to get an exemption, you have to see a medical provider who then has to explain all the things that might happen to your child if you do not immunize. Then that provider will sign the exemption once he/she thinks you are fully informed. I truly don't know if all medical providers will do this.
If your child is in public school and there is an outbreak of one of the diseases, your child may have to stay out of school until the outbreak is over. That could be weeks.
There is good science behind immunizing children and adults. You can chose to believe it or not but you can't complain about consequences. No one is immune to those. It's called real life.
Thanks for the "lesson," but you aren't telling me anything I don't already know. EVERYTHING we do in life has consequences; some may not be fully known for many years, if ever. We can't protect ourselves or our children from everything, as much as we would like to. But, we ALL have the right to make the choices that we decide are best.
If you haven't already, you and everyone else should really study the history of vaccines from multiple sources. Anyone honest with themselves and seeking TRUTH, regardless of what that truth turns out to be, will purposely seek information that goes against the mainstream to see if there just might be something that you missed.
Specializes in School Nursing, Public Health Nurse.
I don't doubt that some injuries are a result of anaphylaxis, but there is no data that I could find on either HRSA or CDC websites that give stats by type of injury, so there's no way to say if they are "many" or few.
Actually there is the Vaccine Information Statements from the CDC.
Mild problems (common)-Fever (up to about 1 child in 4); Redness or swelling where the shot was given (up to about 1 child in 4); Soreness or tenderness where the shot was given (up to about 1 child in 4)Other mild problems include- Fussiness (up to about 1 child in 3); Tiredness or poor appetite (up to about 1 child in 10); Vomiting (up to about 1 child in 50)
Moderate problems (uncommon)- Seizure (jerking or staring) (about 1 child out of 14,000); Non-stop crying, for 3 hours or more (up to about 1 child out of 1,000), High fever, over 105°F (about 1 child out of 16,000);
Severe problems (very rare)- Serious allergic reaction (less than 1 out of a million doses); Several other severe problems have been reported after DTaP vaccine. These include:Long-term seizures, coma, or lowered consciousness; Permanent brain damage.
MMR:
Mild problems-Fever (up to 1 person out of 6); Mild rash (about 1 person out of 20); Swelling of glands in the cheeks or neck (about 1 person out of 75)
Moderate problems- Seizure (jerking or staring) caused by fever (about 1 out of 3,000 doses); Temporary pain and stiffness in the joints, mostly in teenage or adult women (up to 1 out of 4); Temporary low platelet count, which can cause a bleeding disorder (about 1 out of 30,000 doses)
Severe problems (very rare)- Serious allergic reaction (less than 1 out of a million
doses); Several other severe problems have been reported after a child gets MMR vaccine, including: Deafness, long-term seizures, coma, or lowered consciousness, permanent brain damage
I'm not going to post all the vaccine stats but they are there.
Personally, I think I'll stick with the sources that are solid and verifiable, thanks. I'm sure others will agree.
You've stated that those who choose not to vaccinate have NO DUTY to explain themselves to ANYONE. I find it strange that you've chosen to bombard this thread with your posts doing what you state you are under absolutely no obligation to do - "explaining" yourself. Seems to me that it's more to your own benefit, to justify it all to yourself. You certainly aren't going to change the thinking of anyone here. We know the facts.
Mild problems (common)-Fever (up to about 1 child in 4); Redness or swelling where the shot was given (up to about 1 child in 4); Soreness or tenderness where the shot was given (up to about 1 child in 4)Other mild problems include- Fussiness (up to about 1 child in 3); Tiredness or poor appetite (up to about 1 child in 10); Vomiting (up to about 1 child in 50)
Moderate problems (uncommon)- Seizure (jerking or staring) (about 1 child out of 14,000); Non-stop crying, for 3 hours or more (up to about 1 child out of 1,000), High fever, over 105°F (about 1 child out of 16,000);
Severe problems (very rare)- Serious allergic reaction (less than 1 out of a million doses); Several other severe problems have been reported after DTaP vaccine. These include:Long-term seizures, coma, or lowered consciousness; Permanent brain damage.
MMR:
Mild problems-Fever (up to 1 person out of 6); Mild rash (about 1 person out of 20); Swelling of glands in the cheeks or neck (about 1 person out of 75)
Moderate problems- Seizure (jerking or staring) caused by fever (about 1 out of 3,000 doses); Temporary pain and stiffness in the joints, mostly in teenage or adult women (up to 1 out of 4); Temporary low platelet count, which can cause a bleeding disorder (about 1 out of 30,000 doses)
Severe problems (very rare)- Serious allergic reaction (less than 1 out of a million
doses); Several other severe problems have been reported after a child gets MMR vaccine, including: Deafness, long-term seizures, coma, or lowered consciousness, permanent brain damage
I'm not going to post all the vaccine stats but they are there.
I have seen these and they are projections. Not the actual breakdown of the compensable cases.
GM2RN
1,850 Posts
Yes, all medications have potential side effects. And if doctors are doing their jobs, both ethically and legally, they are informing their patients of the potential side effects so that patients can decide for themselves whether or not the benefits outweigh the risks. Lest we forget, patients have a right to self-determination, and parents of children have that same right to decide for their children. The difference between vaccines and other medications is that everyone recognizes and accepts that FACT about other medications, but some would strip patients of that right when it comes to vaccines if they could.
As for the stats on vaccines on the HRSA website, you have misquoted some information. There is NO data for vaccines ADMINISTERED, only data for doses DISTRIBUTED, which can be quite a difference. Doses distributed includes vaccines that go to warehouses, vaccines that expire, those dropped or have otherwise become contaminated, etc. So the number is naturally inflated with no way to know how many have actually been administered.
Further, cases that were dismissed tells me nothing since cases of ALL types are dismissed in court all the time due to a lack of evidence at the time it is presented. Some cases are re-filed when adequate evidence is available; some are dismissed because they weren't filed in the required time-frame but not because they lacked evidence; others are likely dismissed for other technical reasons. Dismissal of a case does NOT equal no injury from a vaccine in all cases.
Yes, the court made the determination in these cases. HRSA and the CDC are the last groups that one would expect to admit an injury linked to vaccines. Do you think that they have not consulted tons of doctors and scientists in these matters??? They would not admit to ANY injuries if they could get away with it (and did so for a long time), so if they can see a link between vaccines and injury, that's good enough for me.
As for the increase in autism cases, nobody is claiming that they are ALL due to vaccine injury!