I have been reseaching vaccinations lately, out of curiosity...
Before the age of 18 months children are given between 22 and 30 vaccines. By the age of 5 they are given 38. Now, mercury has been found at toxic levels in these shots...even for adults.
So, my question is this: How many of you RN's would delay your childs vaccination schedule? How do you feel about the 22-30 vaccines given to a child before 18 months?
I do not feel it is neccessary at birth or in infancy... I mean, Hep B shots at birth? Polio? DpT, etc. I do not feel that delaying vaccines until 2-3 would increase the risk of the child getting these diseases.
In fact, I read where there is no correlation in third world countries between vaccines and decreased infectious diseases. But that there was correlation between good hygiene and diet and decreased infectious diseases (the dieseases decreased by 95%)
I read that babies at 1.5 years were normally developing and after the vaccines their development (physically, mentally, etc) slowed severely and were diagnosed with Autism (oddly enough Autism and Mercury poisoning have almost exact symptoms...)
Like I said, I have just began researching the correlation between Autism and vaccines...and was wondering how people in the medical community felt. And I do not have kids yet, so its just research that caught my eye lol
I have been reseaching vaccinations lately, out of curiosity...
Before the age of 18 months children are given between 22 and 30 vaccines. By the age of 5 they are given 38. Now, mercury has been found at toxic levels in these shots...even for adults.
So, my question is this: How many of you RN's would delay your childs vaccination schedule? How do you feel about the 22-30 vaccines given to a child before 18 months?
I do not feel it is neccessary at birth or in infancy... I mean, Hep B shots at birth? Polio? DpT, etc. I do not feel that delaying vaccines until 2-3 would increase the risk of the child getting these diseases.
In fact, I read where there is no correlation in third world countries between vaccines and decreased infectious diseases. But that there was correlation between good hygiene and diet and decreased infectious diseases (the dieseases decreased by 95%)
I read that babies at 1.5 years were normally developing and after the vaccines their development (physically, mentally, etc) slowed severely and were diagnosed with Autism (oddly enough Autism and Mercury poisoning have almost exact symptoms...)
Like I said, I have just began researching the correlation between Autism and vaccines...and was wondering how people in the medical community felt. And I do not have kids yet, so its just research that caught my eye lol
I think you will find America unlike other developed countries have schedules that are generally prompted by MONEY!, fear of being sued (vaccines are a pre-emtive strike solution), big business dictating, laws dictated with little thought for effect, following protocol with little research and not wanting the ridicule associated with taking a stand or being different. How else can we account for our differences from the rest of the world ( which is clearly media and Hollywood driven) which seems to me anyway, so obvious and destructive. I will take flak for this reply because it seems our patriotism supersedes our sense of decency and good sense. No one ever takes the time to contemplate what is being said only that their point of view must be heard. I mean where else can we have the things that take place here, polygamy, Kansas education board, WMD's, just look at the news. I think you are right to question what's occuring and even if you are maybe wrong, at least you are informed and making an effort and not simply following the herd. Kudos to you!
Many of us who had chickenpox didn't see a doc for it, we just stayed home a week or so and had calamine lotion all over us. What I did was have a titer drawn by the health dept. to show that I'm immune to chickenpox. Same for my other things, but I wound up needing a few boosters to things like measles, hepatitis, etc. It's worth checking on a titer vs. automatically vaccinating if you know your kid had chickenpox.
I never even thought about having a titer drawn for chicken pox! To be honest with you, I don't even remember if I took my son to the Dr. or not. I don't think I did - It was so long ago! I will have to call the county health department for those titers!
Ummm, maybe you have me confused with someone else? Maybe JennRN, whose son had a reaction to the MMR? My post didn't quote you and wasn't in response to anything you posted.
I agree with your statement that every medication et vaccination has a risk for reaction et it is an issue of benefits vs. risks. How do you feel about parents' rights to decide whether something is a benefit or too much of a risk for their child? Or should the government make that decision when it comes to community health, meaning that parents do not have the right to decline certain treatments for their children?
Whatever your thoughts, of course they are welcome. Disagreeing does not mean that an opinion is not respected.
OOOPPSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!:omy: Sorry about that! I was still half asleep when I posted that and yes I did have you confused with JennRN. Jenn - Jean, Very close you know! Sorry! (the claws did come out a little, didn't they? That happens when I'm tired!)
Now that I'm actually coherent! Yes, parents have the right to decide if a treatment's benefit outweighs the risk. I made the choice not to give my son the chicken pox vaccine, didn't think it was needed. If his case of chicken pox was severe enough that he would've needed to be hospitalized then, yes, I would've regretted not having him get the vaccine. No, government shouldn't have the right to mandate all vaccines. That would be a major setback for our country. Land of the free - that's what my great-grandfather, father, cousins and friends have fought for! Although, to contradict myself - I do belief that it is important that some are mandated for for school - such as MMR. If one's child is homeschooled and not in contact with large groups of people - then the chance of contracting or spreading something is a little bit less. Spread of these diseases is very scarey! I don't agree with how many are given in such a short amount of time.
I think there is a movement afoot to start vaccinating adults against chickenpox to prevent the later reemergence of shingles.
My father actually had his varicella vaccine last week. I thought it was kinda silly seeing he had a pretty bad case of chicken pox as a kid. But, his doctor greatly encouraged him to get it because of my father's health problems. Shingles would almost certainly be a death sentence for my father. So, after thinking about it that way - I agreed.
I honestly don't recall those specifics in the study. Since it did cover 500,000 children, I'd have to believe that it was done with the best standards they could muster, including the question you ask. Still, knowing that the incidence of autism WAS just a mite higher amongst the non-vaccinated group, it would have to punch a hole in the idea that the non-vaccinated siblings were therefore less at risk (from the vaccinations) because the parents delayed or eliminated them. As I recall, the folks in charge of that study were dumbfounded to realize that particular result. This study also followed these children for quite a number of years, so it wasn't just a cluster of sudden diagnoses; it was consistent between the two groups.
Something other than vaccinations was causing these children to be autistic.
Actually it wouldn't. If the sibs or relatives are at 5 to 10 times baseline risk, and they came out less than that when parents decided to withhold vaccines, that would show a protective effect from the withholding.
My husband did a health survey on vaccines and childhood illness financed by a wealthy man whose son was autistic, and his results showed no definitive link for autism but something there for asthma.
I think you will find America unlike other developed countries have schedules that are generally prompted by MONEY!, fear of being sued (vaccines are a pre-emtive strike solution), big business dictating, laws dictated with little thought for effect, following protocol with little research and not wanting the ridicule associated with taking a stand or being different.
I profoundly disagree.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices does an excellent job of weighing the available evidence. They also listen to a considerable amount of public comment (no matter how odd it may be) and use it in their decision making process. They are professionals dedicated to public health.
That said, state governments which set the requirements for vaccination are open to persuasion by lobbyists etc and may not always act in the interest of public health.
The desire not to vaccinate is legitimate. There are legitimate political arguments made about about not having the govt intrude into the personal spheres of the body and the family. Attributing the motivation of the committed professionals at the CDC to "MONEY!" does a disservice to the persons making logical and cogent arguments against vaccination.
Furthermore protocols, vaccines, schedules, are extensively studied. Would you call the Danish study of MMR and Autism "little?" If so, what criteria are you using?
Perhaps vaccines are not studied enough - indeed I argue for more study. But to imply that recommendations and protocols are instituted solely at the behest of "big business" is just plain silly. Indeed, a major factor in recommending the HPV vaccine was testimony for advocacy groups - particularily testimony from the families of women that died of cervical cancer and of persons with head/neck cancer.
Additionally, the United States has recommendations that are remarkably similar to other nations.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices does an excellent job of weighing the available evidence. They also listen to a considerable amount of public comment (no matter how odd it may be) and use it in their decision making process. They are professionals dedicated to public health.
That said, state governments which set the requirements for vaccination are open to persuasion by lobbyists etc and may not always act in the interest of public health.
If you pulled the 1572s of some of the CDC physicians you might be surprised how many profit from pharmaceutical companies. Many of the CDC's studies a funded with pharma money. For example, the CDC varicella vaccination study on shingles incidence in people over 50 was funded by Merck. Does that mean that they are in big pharma's pocket? No. They have to get the funding from somewhere but it is just unfortunate that it gives the impression of impropriety. With that being said, money does talk, funding, especially in public health is tight, and I can see some CDC doc giving in and scratching the back of some company. I have seen a lot of good in my few years in research. But I have also seen a lot of shadiness. Fortunately, I still have faith in the CDC to keep things on the up and up.
If you pulled the 1572s of some of the CDC physicians you might be surprised how many profit from pharmaceutical companies. Many of the CDC's studies a funded with pharma money. For example, the CDC varicella vaccination study on shingles incidence in people over 50 was funded by Merck. Does that mean that they are in big pharma's pocket? No. They have to get the funding from somewhere but it is just unfortunate that it gives the impression of impropriety. With that being said, money does talk, funding, especially in public health is tight, and I can see some CDC doc giving in and scratching the back of some company. I have seen a lot of good in my few years in research. But I have also seen a lot of shadiness. Fortunately, I still have faith in the CDC to keep things on the up and up.
You raise some important points.
It strikes me that pharma wields significant influence in research and approval process. Pharma money often directs the research questions that get asked and the therefore shapes the research that is done rather than out and out buying influence,. Pharma of course responds to the needs of her investors - these are not necessarily congruent with the needs societies public health needs. Nonetheless, there is considerable NIH money available for research - so pharma does not fund everything.
I agree, the folks at the CDC are pretty much on the up and up, especially when it comes to disclosure. The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices posts its minutes on their website
Their minutes contain full disclosure about the relationship of members to groups and companies appearing before the panel.
The question that I find perplexing is "How might we fix this?" I am not sure that public funding alone for research would be qualitatively better - different questions would get asked, but they still might not be the "best" research questions. Pharma investigates diseases that they feel they can provide treatments. Should we investigate diseases that are the most expensive? Cause the most suffering? Have the most vocal advocates?
I do believe in vaccinations but not the schedule provided by the APA. I personally think its too many introductions of DNA/RNA to a developing immune system. I have delayed my children's vaccines until their first birthday and only give one vaccine at a time (they also have severe allergies so this is supported by my pediatrician). I also have dismissed certain vaccines that I feel are unnecessary. (Do your research I won't do it for you).
It is true that these disease are terrible and deadly. More so for adults than children however. But guess what? If you aren't in the healthcare field and you are over the age of 30, you are most likely no longer immune to these diseases (and guess who is traveling to 3rd world countries for business?? Non-immune business persons who only presented documents that they were immunized when they were little...not titers to prove they are immune). So herd immunity is more threatened by these business men than the children. The children are at risk (therefore, I do support vaccines). Yes, I also believe the studies that showed a link between thimerosol (mercury) and autism are correct...though they somehow QUICKLY disappeared after the APA released a statement that VAERS should not be used for studies because its not necessarily a correlation but a coincidence or mistake (give me a break...why do we have VAERS in the first place?!). Sorry mini-tangent. There are so many directions I could go on this but I won't for the sake of brevity and to avoid arguing.
Anyhow, I have seen vaccinated children actually contract the diseases they were vaccinated against because there are different strands (guess what there are multiple strands of pertussis AND chicken pox...and no it wasn't a case of shingles... and lord knows what else). I've seen statements from the pharmaceutical companies that say there is a very small chance of contracting the illness from the vaccine (but most likely because they already had it in their system and the vaccine caused a delayed immune response...or so "they say")
I believe until these diseases are erraticated its our duty to protect our families...those who do not vaccinate, its is their perogitive IMO as long as they don't point fingers...I will not blame them for "taking advantage of herd immunity" as I heard an OP from another board state...because if you are vaccinated or your children...why blame them? Blame the non-immune travelers that aren't going to the doctor because "they aren't sick"...blah blah blah and so forth.
And if I may make an observation...I've seen the correlation between research funding, pharmaceutical companies, and politicians, (directly from my Sociology book!) and I would like to say that anyone that wants to quote a research study for any reason, don't...its not accurate no matter what it says. I try to use research studies to form my decisions but in the end your guess is as good as mine.
Sorry! (the claws did come out a little, didn't they? That happens when I'm tired!)
. 
HM2VikingRN, RN
4,700 Posts
I think there is a movement afoot to start vaccinating adults against chickenpox to prevent the later reemergence of shingles.