1. 2. 3. Life in a Small House: Organic, Green, and on a Budget: Opening the Can 4. 12. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 23. 24.

25. 26. Opening the Can 27. 28.

29.
So here we go. I've mentioned before that two unaffiliated doctors believe that the cause of Liam's stroke was the chicken pox vaccine he was given two weeks prior to that unforgettable night.

Quinn reading to Liam while we wait for his "mandated" kindergarten shots.


I've spent nearly every week the past month declining the flu, pertussis, and measles/mumps/rubella vaccines at my obygyn's office. (That's one problem with seeing a group of docs for a pregnancy - I keep finding myself explaining my views over and over.)

We have always been leery of vaccines. We have always done a delayed schedule. All this with doing little to no research. We were just following our gut.

But now we've started the research. We've got a third baby on it's way and to say we're simply leery of vaccines would be a great understatement.


Here's the first thing I've learned that scares me. There is a large fund of monies set aside by the government/vaccine companies that is used to compensate any family that has had a severe vaccine reaction. (To qualify for this, the effects of the reaction need to last for more than six months.)Whether or not Liam will qualify for compensation is not an issue right now. What is, is that there is this fund and it prevents parents from suing the vaccine companies. Not only is there a fund, but they have a table set up with common reactions and the amount of money to be given as compensation. So, they are aware of these reactions and have taken measures to be sure the vaccine companies do not "go under" from lawsuits. Go ahead and take a look at that site. There's links to how much has been spent on compensations, the types, and how to go about claiming an injury.

That's all well and good. Some would argue that those types of reactions are so RARE and that the benefits of vaccines far out weigh the risks.

Here's an an interesting article regarding the flu vaccine that is so widely advertised and publicized you'd think it was running for president or something. It is near impossible to go anywhere without being asked if you'd like a flu shot. As a matter of fact, CVS will offer 20% off your entire purchase if you choose to get the flu shot there.  It's obvious that companies will benefit from each flu shot they sell.  The article is a very easy read... I suggest you read it yourself, but it shows that people who had the flu shot were MORE likely to get the flu than those who opted not to have the flu shot.

So, what does that mean for the vaccines that are designed to prevent more serious illnesses? According to this very lengthy article, most of the common vaccines are not effective. "While recent outbreaks of pertussis, measles, and mumps have officially been blamed on those who are unvaccinated, published studies into the outbreaks have confirmed that the vast majority of those affected were vaccinated, and place the blame on ineffective vaccines – NOT insufficient vaccination rates."

Here's another link.  In this one you can see what the ingredients are for the vaccines.  But also, there are charts that show the decline of serious illinesses and when vaccines were introduced into the mix.  (Most serious illinesses were already declining before vaccines were introduced.  And typhoid fever was totally elminated without vaccines ever being introduced.)  This link also has many links to more information - you could spend all day here, but my favorite is the User-Friendly Vaccination Schedule.

Not every thing I've read is totally against vaccines. Dr. Jay Gordan claims to look at each patient as an individual and decide what they might need. A child whose family travels to third world countries needs more protection than that of a child whose family vacations is less exotic places. He has this to say about the Hepatitis B vaccine, which is commonly given within 48 hours of birth.

"Q. What is you opinion of the Hepatitis B vaccine and how do you deal with it in your practice?

A. I try not to give it to any kids. It does a very good job of preventing hepatitis B, no doubt about that, but it also hits the immune system pretty hard and possibly creates autoimmune problems. The French stopped giving this shot for a while because they thought they saw an increase in multiple sclerosis in recipients. Very few experts agree with this finding but the data were not bad. Other relatively reasonable docs think that diabetes or lupus might be on the rise because of the HBV.

Creating the false security that unprotected sex is safer or that drug use is safer just opens people up to the possibilities of Hep C, AIDS or pregnancy.

I also think that there will be a much better shot in the next 5-10 years."

I highly recommend you check out his website and see where he stands on vaccines.

The choice to vaccinate your child should be a very personal decision. However, we all know that certain vaccines are "required" and avoiding those vaccines can become difficult. As of now, parents can claim religious, personal, or medical reasons for not vaccinating their children. Here's a lengthy article about Paul Offit, a vaccine inventor, seeking to put an end to religious and philosophical vaccine exemptions.

It should always remain a personal decision.  I've heard some parents who choose to vaccinate on the current schedule are worried about the increasing numbers of those parents choosing not to.  I do not understand this.  If you truly believe in the power of vaccinations you have no reason to worry that the child sitting next to your child in class may or may not have "up to date" vaccinations. 

So... what are we planning on doing?  For now - we'll be leaving the hopsital with our baby receiving only a Vitamin K shot (to help with blood clotting).  Our baby will not recieve the HepB shot.  That will buy us two months at which point we will have to make some decisions that may be difficult to talk with our doctor about, but it's our baby and our choice.  We will continue to inform ourselves the best we can.  I have a feeling we will postpone starting any vaccinations until at least two years.  Here's a great article about other ways to boost your immune system.


Labels: , ,

30. 31. 32. Life in a Small House: Organic, Green, and on a Budget: Opening the Can

Tuesday, October 16, 2012

Opening the Can

So here we go. I've mentioned before that two unaffiliated doctors believe that the cause of Liam's stroke was the chicken pox vaccine he was given two weeks prior to that unforgettable night.

Quinn reading to Liam while we wait for his "mandated" kindergarten shots.


I've spent nearly every week the past month declining the flu, pertussis, and measles/mumps/rubella vaccines at my obygyn's office. (That's one problem with seeing a group of docs for a pregnancy - I keep finding myself explaining my views over and over.)

We have always been leery of vaccines. We have always done a delayed schedule. All this with doing little to no research. We were just following our gut.

But now we've started the research. We've got a third baby on it's way and to say we're simply leery of vaccines would be a great understatement.


Here's the first thing I've learned that scares me. There is a large fund of monies set aside by the government/vaccine companies that is used to compensate any family that has had a severe vaccine reaction. (To qualify for this, the effects of the reaction need to last for more than six months.)Whether or not Liam will qualify for compensation is not an issue right now. What is, is that there is this fund and it prevents parents from suing the vaccine companies. Not only is there a fund, but they have a table set up with common reactions and the amount of money to be given as compensation. So, they are aware of these reactions and have taken measures to be sure the vaccine companies do not "go under" from lawsuits. Go ahead and take a look at that site. There's links to how much has been spent on compensations, the types, and how to go about claiming an injury.

That's all well and good. Some would argue that those types of reactions are so RARE and that the benefits of vaccines far out weigh the risks.

Here's an an interesting article regarding the flu vaccine that is so widely advertised and publicized you'd think it was running for president or something. It is near impossible to go anywhere without being asked if you'd like a flu shot. As a matter of fact, CVS will offer 20% off your entire purchase if you choose to get the flu shot there.  It's obvious that companies will benefit from each flu shot they sell.  The article is a very easy read... I suggest you read it yourself, but it shows that people who had the flu shot were MORE likely to get the flu than those who opted not to have the flu shot.

So, what does that mean for the vaccines that are designed to prevent more serious illnesses? According to this very lengthy article, most of the common vaccines are not effective. "While recent outbreaks of pertussis, measles, and mumps have officially been blamed on those who are unvaccinated, published studies into the outbreaks have confirmed that the vast majority of those affected were vaccinated, and place the blame on ineffective vaccines – NOT insufficient vaccination rates."

Here's another link.  In this one you can see what the ingredients are for the vaccines.  But also, there are charts that show the decline of serious illinesses and when vaccines were introduced into the mix.  (Most serious illinesses were already declining before vaccines were introduced.  And typhoid fever was totally elminated without vaccines ever being introduced.)  This link also has many links to more information - you could spend all day here, but my favorite is the User-Friendly Vaccination Schedule.

Not every thing I've read is totally against vaccines. Dr. Jay Gordan claims to look at each patient as an individual and decide what they might need. A child whose family travels to third world countries needs more protection than that of a child whose family vacations is less exotic places. He has this to say about the Hepatitis B vaccine, which is commonly given within 48 hours of birth.

"Q. What is you opinion of the Hepatitis B vaccine and how do you deal with it in your practice?

A. I try not to give it to any kids. It does a very good job of preventing hepatitis B, no doubt about that, but it also hits the immune system pretty hard and possibly creates autoimmune problems. The French stopped giving this shot for a while because they thought they saw an increase in multiple sclerosis in recipients. Very few experts agree with this finding but the data were not bad. Other relatively reasonable docs think that diabetes or lupus might be on the rise because of the HBV.

Creating the false security that unprotected sex is safer or that drug use is safer just opens people up to the possibilities of Hep C, AIDS or pregnancy.

I also think that there will be a much better shot in the next 5-10 years."

I highly recommend you check out his website and see where he stands on vaccines.

The choice to vaccinate your child should be a very personal decision. However, we all know that certain vaccines are "required" and avoiding those vaccines can become difficult. As of now, parents can claim religious, personal, or medical reasons for not vaccinating their children. Here's a lengthy article about Paul Offit, a vaccine inventor, seeking to put an end to religious and philosophical vaccine exemptions.

It should always remain a personal decision.  I've heard some parents who choose to vaccinate on the current schedule are worried about the increasing numbers of those parents choosing not to.  I do not understand this.  If you truly believe in the power of vaccinations you have no reason to worry that the child sitting next to your child in class may or may not have "up to date" vaccinations. 

So... what are we planning on doing?  For now - we'll be leaving the hopsital with our baby receiving only a Vitamin K shot (to help with blood clotting).  Our baby will not recieve the HepB shot.  That will buy us two months at which point we will have to make some decisions that may be difficult to talk with our doctor about, but it's our baby and our choice.  We will continue to inform ourselves the best we can.  I have a feeling we will postpone starting any vaccinations until at least two years.  Here's a great article about other ways to boost your immune system.


Labels: , ,

5 Comments:

At October 16, 2012 at 10:28 AM , Blogger Christie said...

Frontline did a vaccine story that is now streaming on Netflix. It's called Frontline: The Vaccine Wars. I thought it came off a little on the side of vaccines but there was a good explanation of the argument for herd immunity. (Which is briefly described here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity) I am making no judgment at all either way. It also talks about the difficult situation vaccine producers are in. Nobody wants to test these things on kids. The incentive to do so is helped by the fund that is set up to keep them from ruin in the event children are hurt. It is my understanding this is true for instances only in which negligence is not found.

Our pediatric oncologist stopped all live-virus vaccinations for Hen when he became neutropenic at age 9 months. We are s l o w l y catching up. He has obtained the necessary medical exemption so that he can still attend (pre)school. It was interesting to be questioned about it by a health director without a medical degree when I went to turn in our paperwork. The person I spoke with was not a medical doctor but she was questioning the letter from my doctor, and my medical excuse was examined when those claiming a religious exemption were not. In fact, the lady I spoke with said I should have just used a religious exemption because once that box is checked, there are no further questions.

I'm with you, parents should decide. I think the problem is that many are making that call based on data known to be discredited - i.e. the study that one guy did that said vaccines were causing autism that has now been debunked by seven (twelve?) other studies. It speaks volumes that people are so distrusting off a government entity like the CDC. The only vaccines they should be trumpeting, if any, are those that prevent deadly diseases. And I certainly don't think that babies should get a vaccine for a sexually transmitted disease. Wtheck?

 
At October 16, 2012 at 11:43 AM , Blogger Mandie said...

This is so hard. I'm sorry you're dealing with it.

We didn't vaccinate, then we delayed. I feel like the reason we had the luxury of making the decision to refuse and delay was because of herd immunity. So now that my boys are older, very healthy, and the doctor whom we trust extremely doesn't see a problem with it, we worked with him to create a schedule of vaccines he thought were important. I want other parents to have that same luxury of educated decision-making, rather than rushing into shots, and so we're doing our part to keep herd immunity in tact.

We did the CP vaccine (and first), because Quentin, with his sensory issues, would NOT cope with getting chicken pox. That means he's going to have to get boosters forever, and it sucks.

When we decided to send him to school, we had to get him on a schedule for a certain number of vaccinations (regardless of what we and the doc had decided), because I was not comfortable claiming a religious exemption.

I really wish there were a better way.

 
At October 16, 2012 at 12:07 PM , Blogger Cathy said...

I'm not sure I believe the herd immunity. The recent whooping cough outbreak had 80% of those who were current with their whooping cough vaccines.

 
At October 16, 2012 at 2:13 PM , Blogger Unknown said...

(I think this says Michael - but it's Amy) Well written Cathy and I agree that it should be your decision completely for your new baby. Obviously there are risk factors for your family (and anyone for that matter). I think Liam's stroke was caused by the chicken pox vaccine and that's horrible! But I do believe in herd immunity. I think scientists wouldn't claim vaccinations to be 100% effective and in the case of pertussis clearly the effectiveness wanes. I understand both sides and I think there is information to support whichever side you're on. This article talks about how the increase in Pertussis is 9% higher in Washington than the rest of the nation and they're claiming Washington has a strong antivax movement and higher rate of parents opting not to vaccinate. http://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/Is-lack-of-vaccination-boosting-whooping-cough-3731267.php
I think every parent just needs to do what they think is best for their kids. If I vaccinate, I'm going to worry about a reaction and if I don't I'm going to worry about illness. Ugh! It's stressful being a parent!

 
At October 16, 2012 at 2:51 PM , Blogger Christie said...

Not to make this devolve into an argument over semantics but the science behind herd immunity (or community immunity) is pretty solid. Does that mean we should force parents to vaccinate? Absolutely not. There is an editorial note I found that explains some of the reasons that Washington outbreak of whooping cough caused so many vaccinated to get sick. I take away the following: unvaccinated children are eight times more likely to become infected, and that vaccinated people have less severe symptoms and a shorter recovery time. Also, epidemology of pertussis has changed. I assume that eventually our current vaccination will need to be tweaked to be more effective.

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6128a1.htm
http://www.niaid.nih.gov/topics/pages/communityimmunity.aspx

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home