Why I'm Not an Anti-Vaxer

[indigo girl]

crof takes on the anti-vaccine crowd, and makes the case for why he is in favor of the swine flu vaccine. i agree with him.

i do understand that some people will choose not to be vaccinated. i can respect

that. what gets me upset though with some of the more vocal anti-vaxers is that misinformation

is being spread, sometimes in a quite deliberate attempt to mislead less informed readers. often

myths are being spread simply due to ignorance.

someone even claimed to be involved with sending a sample of the new vaccine

to a lab for analysis, and that it contained among other things, the adjuvant,

squalene. what was truly astounding about this was that it was written about a

week before the vaccine had even been released and could not possibly have been

true. the adjuvant, btw is not even licensed for use in the us.

two of the most frequent untruths being hinted at and even posted as fact is that squalene is secretly in the us swine flu vaccine, and that baxter labs, infamous for a contaminated flu vaccine incident in europe is one of the providers of the swine flu vaccine for the us. both myths are untrue, but you wouldn't know that if you were unfamiliar with information about the influenza vaccines, and many people are not.

http://crofsblogs.typepad.com/h5n1/2009/10/why-im-not-an-anti-vaxer.html

i have placed references to mike adams statements in red for easier reading.

thanks to the reader who sent the link to this item from natural news.com: swine flu vaccine victims encouraged to post reports of side effects on swinefluvaccinereport.com by mike adams the health ranger. it gives me a chance to explain why i'm such an old crab about these guys....

as the swine flu vaccination campaigns begin sweeping across america, naturalnews has created a new website where victims of swine flu vaccine side effects can post their true stories about what happened to them or their children.

"victims of swine flu side effects" and "post their true stories" are great examples of begging the question: assuming the truth of something still under debate.

the website is http://www.swinefluvaccinereport.com and it was created by naturalnews editor mike adams for the simple purpose of "shedding light" on the potential side effects of the swine flu vaccine.

"potential side effects" is meaningless. a potential side effect of shaving is cutting your own throat. so what?

anyone can post on the site. all posts are moderated, so it takes some time for new posts to be approved. any posts that appear to be fictitious will be deleted.

well, i delete some posts too, but not because they're fictitious. they're wrong and therefore just a waste of time.

"this website gives swine flu vaccine sufferers an opportunity to share their true stories with the world," said mike adams, also the writer of the popular hip-hop song 'don't inject me.'

"swine flu vaccine sufferers" = more begging the question. then a brilliant example of the appeal to authority: he's not only the editor of the site, he's a ... hip-hop writer. of a popular song.

"while vaccine manufacturers are trying to censor the truth about the dangers of their vaccines, we are working to serve the public interest by openly revealing the truth about how these vaccines are impacting real people."

more loaded language: "censor the truth," "dangers of their vaccines," "serve the public interest." how can we not trust this guy? adams is on the record saying that the swine flu vaccines are likely more dangerous than the swine flu itself.

so what? does this mean if you survive a vaccination he'll give you your money back?

the extremely mild nature of h1n1 influenza, combined with the increasing reports of seizures and deaths from cervical cancer vaccines, leads many people to be openly concerned about the risk / reward ratio of swine flu vaccination.

close to an outright lie from this promoter of truth. "increasing reports" = one case of a poor girl who died of a malignant tumor in her chest shortly after receiving an hpv vaccination she would never need. "many people" is just another example of the bandwagon propaganda device: if many people believe something, there must be something to it.

"there is no medically justifiable reason to be vaccinated against such a mild flu," says adams. "this vaccine is clearly being pushed solely as a revenue generator for the pharmaceutical companies, not as a serious effort to protect public health."

if i refused a vaccination, caught h1n1, and passed it along to a pregnant woman or an asthmatic child, i would have a hell of a lot on my conscience.

the vaccination isn't all about me, or about those wikkid big pharma corporations--it's about building a barrier to protect the people who really do get terribly sick from this "mild flu."

maybe mr. adams the hip-hop star ought to spend some time in icus, seeing what this mild virus can do.

and he then might try making his case in the unemotional, rational language of the medical profession, instead of resorting to semantic gimmicks and logical fallacies that aristotle would have laughed at.

i'm sorry if i've upset some of my regular visitors with this rant. i realize some people have genuine reasons for refusing a vaccination. but as the pandemic has gone on, the anti-vaxers have grown increasingly smug in their rejection of the medical science that has repeatedly saved their ignorant asses from death before the age of 5.

sixty-one years ago next month, i caught polio for the lack of a vaccine. i could have ended up in an iron lung, or lurching around with crutches and braces on my legs, like one of my classmates (who caught polio twice).

when the polio vaccine came along, you'd better believe i took it--and so did my father and brother, both of whom probably had undiagnosed polio about the time i did. so did millions of others, and now polio has effectively vanished from the civilized world, like smallpox.

regular readers of this blog know that i know how minor this pandemic is compared to the ongoing disasters of hiv/aids, tb, malaria, and a host of other diseases.

it's no credit to us that we ignore those deaths. if americans, for example, reported their own gunshot deaths (30,000 a year) as breathlessly as they're reporting their few deaths from swine flu, they might even be moved to do something about that particular public-health catastrophe.

if canadians had really cared about the dismal living conditions (and mortality rates) on our first nations reserves, we'd have forestalled last spring's outbreaks in manitoba.

but our culture shrugs off some deaths and pays attention to others. at the moment, h1n1 deaths are getting attention. most of those deaths are preventable, if we deal seriously with them, and in the process we might learn something that will save lives at risk from worse diseases.

and one thing that will save far, far more lives than it will cost is vaccination.

[RuRnurse?]

C'mon now, no more labels. Those of us who are leary of this new vaccine are not "anti-vaxers". Most of us did not come to our decisions because of rumours and mis-information spread by others.

I agree that some vaccinations have had positive effects. But it is also true that there have been some problems as well. We should be open to all the facts, and willing to consider that aggressive vaccination campaigns might cause troubles we never thought about.

We are experiencing what seems to be an epidemic of autism and auto-immune disorders. Where are these coming from? There are many theories, one is that aggressive vaccinations might be a factor. People who, as a group, do not vaccinate (like the Amish) don't have these problems in their communities. Could there be a connection? Maybe, maybe not, but we MUST consider it until proven wrong.

Neither side should be 'labeled'. I, for one, am not anti-vaccination. I am against forcing anyone to receive an untested substance as a condition of employment. If someone does want a vaccine, they should have access to it, but they should also have access to ALL information available about it, and they should retain the ultimate right to refuse such.

[indigo girl]

C'mon now, no more labels. Those of us who are leary of this new vaccine are not "anti-vaxers". Most of us did not come to our decisions because of rumours and mis-information spread by others.

I agree that some vaccinations have had positive effects. But it is also true that there have been some problems as well. We should be open to all the facts, and willing to consider that aggressive vaccination campaigns might cause troubles we never thought about.

We are experiencing what seems to be an epidemic of autism and auto-immune disorders. Where are these coming from? There are many theories, one is that aggressive vaccinations might be a factor. People who, as a group, do not vaccinate (like the Amish) don't have these problems in their communities. Could there be a connection? Maybe, maybe not, but we MUST consider it until proven wrong.

Neither side should be 'labeled'. I, for one, am not anti-vaccination. I am against forcing anyone to receive an untested substance as a condition of employment. If someone does want a vaccine, they should have access to it, but they should also have access to ALL information available about it, and they should retain the ultimate right to refuse such.

Don't like to be labeled? Neither do I.

Personally, I have no problem if someone wants to refuse the vaccine. I do have a problem with statements not backed up by credible sources.

If you believe that autism and auto-immune diseases are caused by vaccines, you should be able to provide links to information and studies that we can look at and analyze, otherwise it is just opinion or speculation.

[RuRnurse?]

"If you believe that autism and auto-immune diseases are caused by vaccines, you should be able to provide links to information

and studies that we can look at and analyze, otherwise it is just opinion or speculation."

I didn't say that I believed it, just that I was actively seeking information on it. To be honest with you, I simply don't know if there is a connection. It does seem that our modern diseases and disorders are being caused by

SOMETHING. What does it really matter if we are exchanging one set of diseases and disorders for another? I have been reading alot of info lately that has made me think...

I'm GLAD we no longer have to deal with the summer worry about polio, or have to worry that the fever and lesions we develop are smallpox. I'm glad that measles, mumps or rubella are no longer the childhood killers they once were. But I'm not so certain about the other more recent vaccines. They are all meds, are they not? Then we need studies on them. Why is this particular vaccine being fast-tracked without the usual testing procedures? Why have the manufacturers been absolved of liability?

These are questions we need answers to, before just going along and rolling up our sleeves. This doesn't translate into falling for opinion or speculation.

[oramar]

They were giving H1N1 vaccines at my mother's doctor's office on Thursday. That was not what my mom and I were there for but I could see that the line leading to the flu vaccine window was very long. I do believe TV news reports featuring sobbing parent's of dead children have out weighed the concerns of the public over the safety of the vaccine.

[DolceVita, ADN, BSN, RN]

I have some grave concerns about what I hear said about seasonal and H1N1 vaccines. For the record I have had my seasonal flu shot and will have the H1N1 when it gets to my area.

A couple of examples that bothered me just this week....

Example 1: A fellow student in my nursing class states "I am not getting the flu (seasonal) vaccine now because it only lasts three months. I'm waiting until later."

Our clinical instructor makes no attempt to inform said student that her information is out-of-date. By not doing this many other students went away thinking this was valid information. So, when we go to give vaccinations in a flu vaccine clinic in a couple of weeks and a client asks us how long this lasts...what will they respond? Or as often happens with nursing students, family members start asking them about all things health related, including vaccinations. What will these students tell their families? Ever see the old Prell commercial?

Example 2

Last night Bill Maher, who I find is often quite well informed, describes getting a flu vaccine as being injected "with a disease" and that the vaccinations are made by the government (and the government can't be trusted). Blah blah blah.

Sadly Dr. Frist (fmr Sen fm Tennessee) didn't do a strong enough job of correcting him during the interview. I think he should have been much more emphatic when challenging Maher.

The good new is Bill Maher did say that nurses aren't paid enough (course I agree with that).

[lamazeteacher]

Post #1 quote by RuRNurse

"..... I am against forcing anyone to receive an untested substance as a condition of employment......."

I must take issue with RuRnurse posting the above misinformation! The vaccine against A/H1N1 flu has been tested by reliable researchers, and that is why it was approved by the FDA and CDC. Please research statements before stating them.

Having said that, I also want to put forth my own bias against professionals who don't practise good prevention and treatment of illness. We eat dreadful things (fries with Ranch dressing for dinner?) in hospital cafeterias, where we're seen doing that by the families of our patients, exercise less than we should, and weigh more than is good for us. ( I've struggled with that one all my life.) Often we delay getting treatment for ourselves, citing the old saw that caring for others occupies all our time. Dying too young cuts that short!

There are usually deep emotional problems that promote poor health habits, but have been pushed back by those who threaten their own lives. Our heads do rule our bodies! With parity for mental health in the new health care program, hopefully more of us will take advantage of treatment for behavioral deficits. There's a lot of anger exhibited by protesters of anything, that may well be directed more accurately.

I'm not saying that we have to be perfect, just that we need to remember that our actions speak louder than our words, demonstrating dichotomies that make us look like what we say in our opinions and health teaching, is questionnable if we don't practise it ourselves. That said, I believe that if those who resist vaccines took a fair, thorough look at them, we'd see that they're not just another demand upon us without adequate reasons, making us victims of "the establishment".

With all the information literally at our fingertips on the internet, it seems to me that we'd have the public credibility we seek, by accessing that before forming our outspoken opinions. Just be sure that the words you take as truth have no axe to grind, such as beliefs that the pharmaceutical industry is bilking the public. I believe that happens, through my own experience of it, but I'm not going to let that belief cost me my health or life!

If we were better informed, we'd need no pressure by the administrations of our workplaces, to avail ourselves of vaccinations that will not only keep us healthy, but avoid spreading this disease that has cost so many young lives!

[GadgetRN71, ASN, RN]

I think people should have the right to turn down the vaccine. However, I also believe your workplace has every right to put policies in place to ensure that you don't infect other people. They have every right to insist you wear a mask. This way, patients can be informed that the person taking care of them may potentially be contagious. In our job, it's not just about us. There is no way around this and some of our patients are immune compromised on top of everything else.

I also don't trust people to stay home when they're sick..there are always people who think that they win brownie points when they come in with the plague. We nurses are bad like that and I can guarantee you that people will be staggering into work with H1N1. Yes, maybe this person won't have a bad case but the next person may not be so lucky.

[jennifer0702]

My only concern about the H1N1 vaccine is the thiomersal. I've had to take thiomersal free shots now because I found I react to it. I hope they will come out with a preservative free vaccine shortly. I haven't yet heard how long before they release it.

[indigo girl]

My only concern about the H1N1 vaccine is the thiomersal. I've had to take thiomersal free shots now because I found I react to it. I hope they will come out with a preservative free vaccine shortly. I haven't yet heard how long before they release it.

jennifer, only the multidose vials have thimerosal.

Also you could consider getting the mist nasally if you are over two and age 49 or under, not pregnant and not immuno compromised

or living/working with someone who is.

[jennifer0702]

jennifer, only the multidose vials have thimerosal.

Also you could consider getting the mist nasally if you are over two and age 49 or under, not pregnant and not immuno compromised

or living/working with someone who is.

I didn't realize they were coming out with the mist too. I'm going to consider that instead of the shot.

[indigo girl]

I didn't realize they were coming out with the mist too. I'm going to consider that instead of the shot.

It was the first swine flu vaccine that became available as of last week. Many schools have been mailing home permission

slips to parents to sign for this vaccine.

My own hospital is not offering it for our staff, however. We will have the injections instead, and probably multi dose vials.

You will have to check around for where this is available, but it is a good option for you.