........

None of it is biblically or medically valid. Antivax is a modern popular delusion which, hopefully, will pass before too many children drop dead of diseases that nearly no one in the West has had in thirty years.

Unfortunately, the Internet has proven itself to be the great leveler of information. It's just as easy for an idiot to purvey his ideas as an authority (like an M.D.). Combine that with our society's general distrust of "authority," and you've got the recipe for a world of hurt.

I imagine that the "crawl in sick" mentality has as much to do with some employers' over-strict requirements that sick leave be accompanied by a doctor's note. Far easier to just work through the day than jump through a ridiculous number of hoops to prove you shouldn't be there.
 
Ransom said:
I imagine that the "crawl in sick" mentality has as much to do with some employers' over-strict requirements that sick leave be accompanied by a doctor's note.

My previous job required a doctor's note if you were out for 3 days.  However, they only gave us 2.5 days of sick leave per year.  So when I was sick for 3 days, I refused to get a doctor's note when they asked for one.  I told them that I wasn't sick 3 days.  I was sick for 2.5 days, after which I was on vacation.  Nobody pressed me on that point. 

 
Ransom said:
None of it is biblically or medically valid. Antivax is a modern popular delusion which, hopefully, will pass before too many children drop dead of diseases that nearly no one in the West has had in thirty years.

Unfortunately, the Internet has proven itself to be the great leveler of information. It's just as easy for an idiot to purvey his ideas as an authority (like an M.D.). Combine that with our society's general distrust of "authority," and you've got the recipe for a world of hurt.

I imagine that the "crawl in sick" mentality has as much to do with some employers' over-strict requirements that sick leave be accompanied by a doctor's note. Far easier to just work through the day than jump through a ridiculous number of hoops to prove you shouldn't be there.

Most of the jobs I've worked at have had the "miss three days and you need a note" policy. One job, however, required a doctor's note even if you missed just one day. The manager was a tough guy to work for, and I guess he had had, in the past, a lot of call offs, so he instituted that one day policy. Thankfully, I only worked there for a few months and didn't need to call off during that time.
 
aleshanee said:
measles is back.... combine the new anti-vaccine trend with the mentality behind the "crawl into work sick" philosophy.... and epidemics are sure to follow........ it;s only a matter of when..........

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jan/17/too-rich-sick-disneyland-measles-outbreak-reflects-anti-vaccination-trend

the article focuses on the affluent of california.... but i have noticed that it;s not only the uber-rich that have in recent years refused to get their children vaccinated..... but also the uber-righteous..... many christians have begun refusing to vaccinate based initially on the same faked research the affluent based their objections on..... (which implied that vaccinations led to higher rates of autism)......... but since that has been debunked many christians continue to refuse vaccinations now based on religious grounds........ what religious ground would that be?..... is it biblical?.......and where is the concept of "crawling to work sick" taught in scripture?..... and taking the risk of infecting other people with a contigeous illness?.....

Typically I rarely disagree with you and here it's only a partial because as they say, in my own mind "the jury is out" on this one. Having spoke with a relative that's was a RN at a renown Children's hospital and another who is a MD Pediatrician who gave me the exact same conclusion being that they have seen and experienced enough to justify the concerns of each position in this debate. I do believe, as did they, that the statistics are largely pro-vaccination.

What I don't understand is the condescension, even rage, towards those that have an opposing view, on this issue. If one's children are vaccinated are they not protected from the spread of the disease?
If not, does that not contradict the pro-vaccination argument?
If so, why then are they so worried about the other children affecting theirs?

What I do believe is the parents have every right and responsibility to do what they know to be the right thing concerning their children.

It doesn't take a village.
 
Holy Mole said:
aleshanee said:
measles is back.... combine the new anti-vaccine trend with the mentality behind the "crawl into work sick" philosophy.... and epidemics are sure to follow........ it;s only a matter of when..........

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jan/17/too-rich-sick-disneyland-measles-outbreak-reflects-anti-vaccination-trend

the article focuses on the affluent of california.... but i have noticed that it;s not only the uber-rich that have in recent years refused to get their children vaccinated..... but also the uber-righteous..... many christians have begun refusing to vaccinate based initially on the same faked research the affluent based their objections on..... (which implied that vaccinations led to higher rates of autism)......... but since that has been debunked many christians continue to refuse vaccinations now based on religious grounds........ what religious ground would that be?..... is it biblical?.......and where is the concept of "crawling to work sick" taught in scripture?..... and taking the risk of infecting other people with a contigeous illness?.....

Typically I rarely disagree with you and here it's only a partial because as they say, in my own mind "the jury is out" on this one. Having spoke with a relative that's was a RN at a renown Children's hospital and another who is a MD Pediatrician who gave me the exact same conclusion being that they have seen and experienced enough to justify the concerns of each position in this debate. I do believe, as did they, that the statistics are largely pro-vaccination.

What I don't understand is the condescension, even rage, towards those that have an opposing view, on this issue. If one's children are vaccinated are they not protected from the spread of the disease?
If not, does that not contradict the pro-vaccination argument?
If so, why then are they so worried about the other children affecting theirs?

What I do believe is the parents have every right and responsibility to do what they know to be the right thing concerning their children.

It doesn't take a village.

Much of the problem results in adults contracting what used to be "childhood diseases".  For instance, rubella is a mild disease in children, but it is devastating to the unborn children of pregnant women.  I am of the age that the rubella vaccine I received in my youth wasn't effective in providing immunity.  (Medical fact -- look it up if you don't believe me.)  I didn't find this out until I was already pregnant with my son.  Had I contracted rubella (through unvaccinated children) my son might have been born with devastating  birth defects. 

And you men on the forum...if you didn't contract the mumps in your childhood or have been vaccinated for it, you might be in for a nasty surprise.  About 1/3 of men suffer when the mumps travel down into the testes.  Quite painful, from all accounts.  A family member of mine suffered from this.  Anecdotal evidence, but he talked of "basketballs".  Ooh, goodness!

So yes, it hurts when people elect, for whatever reason, not to vaccinate their children.  The harm may manifest in an outbreak among children, but it can also manifest years later in adults.

         
 
lnf said:
Holy Mole said:
aleshanee said:
measles is back.... combine the new anti-vaccine trend with the mentality behind the "crawl into work sick" philosophy.... and epidemics are sure to follow........ it;s only a matter of when..........

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jan/17/too-rich-sick-disneyland-measles-outbreak-reflects-anti-vaccination-trend

the article focuses on the affluent of california.... but i have noticed that it;s not only the uber-rich that have in recent years refused to get their children vaccinated..... but also the uber-righteous..... many christians have begun refusing to vaccinate based initially on the same faked research the affluent based their objections on..... (which implied that vaccinations led to higher rates of autism)......... but since that has been debunked many christians continue to refuse vaccinations now based on religious grounds........ what religious ground would that be?..... is it biblical?.......and where is the concept of "crawling to work sick" taught in scripture?..... and taking the risk of infecting other people with a contigeous illness?.....

Typically I rarely disagree with you and here it's only a partial because as they say, in my own mind "the jury is out" on this one. Having spoke with a relative that's was a RN at a renown Children's hospital and another who is a MD Pediatrician who gave me the exact same conclusion being that they have seen and experienced enough to justify the concerns of each position in this debate. I do believe, as did they, that the statistics are largely pro-vaccination.

What I don't understand is the condescension, even rage, towards those that have an opposing view, on this issue. If one's children are vaccinated are they not protected from the spread of the disease?
If not, does that not contradict the pro-vaccination argument?
If so, why then are they so worried about the other children affecting theirs?

What I do believe is the parents have every right and responsibility to do what they know to be the right thing concerning their children.

It doesn't take a village.

Much of the problem results in adults contracting what used to be "childhood diseases".  For instance, rubella is a mild disease in children, but it is devastating to the unborn children of pregnant women.  I am of the age that the rubella vaccine I received in my youth wasn't effective in providing immunity.  (Medical fact -- look it up if you don't believe me.)  I didn't find this out until I was already pregnant with my son.  Had I contracted rubella (through unvaccinated children) my son might have been born with devastating  birth defects. 

And you men on the forum...if you didn't contract the mumps in your childhood or have been vaccinated for it, you might be in for a nasty surprise.  About 1/3 of men suffer when the mumps travel down into the testes.  Quite painful, from all accounts.  A family member of mine suffered from this.  Anecdotal evidence, but he talked of "basketballs".  Ooh, goodness!

So yes, it hurts when people elect, for whatever reason, not to vaccinate their children.  The harm may manifest in an outbreak among children, but it can also manifest years later in adults.

       

Thank you. There is certainly information and perspective to consider in this argument.

But on the other hand are saying that if a man gets around unvaccinated children and catches "mumps" that there is a 1 in 3 chance that his testicles will swell to the size of basketballs?

:o

Seems I've hit a nerve though and the anti vaccination group isn't the only side prone to a little hype.
 
Heard something about vaccinations that I have never heard before. The reason for so many peanut allergies, is because the vaccinations are processed with peanut oil.

I felt the safest way to protect my children was to vaccinate.
 
kaba said:
Heard something about vaccinations that I have never heard before. The reason for so many peanut allergies, is because the vaccinations are processed with peanut oil.

Peanut oil is not licensed for use in vaccines as an adjuvant in the U.S.; all vaccines must list all their ingredients; and although peanut oil was possibly proposed as an adjuvant some years ago, it was never used - probably because of the well-known problem of peanut allergies, which have been around as long as peanuts have been used as food.
 
subllibrm said:
Because the risk is real:

http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2014/12/michigan_vaccinations_risk_imm.html

From the article: A recent outbreak in Traverse City shut down a 1,200-student charter school for a week, infected students at 14 other school buildings in the region, and has sickened dozens of people and forced hundreds into quarantine.

More:

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2014/11/confirmed_cases_of_whooping_co.html

The risk is only for un-vaccinated students.  If you don't want your child at risk, get him/her vaccinated. 
 
The Rogue Tomato said:
subllibrm said:
Because the risk is real:

http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2014/12/michigan_vaccinations_risk_imm.html

From the article: A recent outbreak in Traverse City shut down a 1,200-student charter school for a week, infected students at 14 other school buildings in the region, and has sickened dozens of people and forced hundreds into quarantine.

More:

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2014/11/confirmed_cases_of_whooping_co.html

The risk is only for un-vaccinated students.  If you don't want your child at risk, get him/her vaccinated.

In all fairness, I argued this and Inf made a good point exposing those at risk beyond the unvaccinated and also made another point worthy of an AC/DC song.  The problem I have is the alternative to free parental choice is to force parents into a conformity against conscience. I suppose the best weapon for the truth is to educate and hash out the debate in venues such as this and larger.
 
Now we're cookin with peanut oil!
 
Holy Mole said:
The Rogue Tomato said:
subllibrm said:
Because the risk is real:

http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2014/12/michigan_vaccinations_risk_imm.html

From the article: A recent outbreak in Traverse City shut down a 1,200-student charter school for a week, infected students at 14 other school buildings in the region, and has sickened dozens of people and forced hundreds into quarantine.

More:

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2014/11/confirmed_cases_of_whooping_co.html

The risk is only for un-vaccinated students.  If you don't want your child at risk, get him/her vaccinated.

In all fairness, I argued this and Inf made a good point exposing those at risk beyond the unvaccinated and also made another point worthy of an AC/DC song.  The problem I have is the alternative to free parental choice is to force parents into a conformity against conscience. I suppose the best weapon for the truth is to educate and hash out the debate in venues such as this and larger.

IMO, the fears are overblown.  I had everything as a kid -- measles, mumps, chicken pox, scarlet fever, and probably a bunch of other things.  So what? 

IMO, parents should just make a choice and try to be considerate (keep your kid at home if he gets sick, vaccinated or not).  I don't think any parent should be forced to vaccinate their kids. 

 
Holy Mole said:
In all fairness, I argued this and Inf made a good point exposing those at risk beyond the unvaccinated and also made another point worthy of an AC/DC song.  The problem I have is the alternative to free parental choice is to force parents into a conformity against conscience. I suppose the best weapon for the truth is to educate and hash out the debate in venues such as this and larger.

As far as my anecdotal evidence, I agree...I should have worded that better.  That's what he said, but I don't really know to what degree he might have exaggerated.  I didn't ask for photographic evidence. :o  But the percentage is a fairly accurate number.  The range I saw on trustworthy medical websites was from 15%-40%, so I picked a number somewhat in the middle.  And by all accounts, it is the most common complication for post-pubescent males.

Now, having clarified my "hype", let me state that I agree in particular with what I have bolded in your quoted post.

It seems much of the debate is based upon faulty, outdated or untrusted information.  That makes it difficult for the average person to weed through it all to make a truly informed decision.

I'm not one that is generally distrustful of the medical profession.  But I am appalled with the dialog about this year's less than efficacious flu shot.  It starts out by stating that the shot does not match the prevailing flu virus, goes on to say that there is a less than 10% chance that it will be effective, and then concludes with a recommendation to get the shot anyway.  The medical profession does a disservice to the community when they spew garbage like that.  It's no wonder that some people choose to not vaccinate their children!

But child vaccination is an important issue, and it does seem that childhood diseases that were virtually eradicated in our country are becoming more common.  It would behoove us all to take the time to search out the truth of the matter.             
 
I don't trust the medical profession.  Ever see some of the commercials for new drugs?  One of the latest is about a drug that can help your complexion.  There's a long list of potential side-effects that include even death.  So you say that's not the medical profession, that's pharmaceuticals?  Well, the pharmaceutical companies make deals with doctors so that they'll prescribe these drugs.  And the doctors do it, more often than not. 

Having said that, I got my kids vaccinated for everything, as required by the states we lived in.  They're doing fine, thank God. 
 
It is frustrating that we can't trust the "experts" on either side to present unbiased research.

Since this year's flu shot was mentioned, it is a shame that it has been so ineffective. Seems like the people I know who contracted influenza this year are the ones who had the flu shot.
 
The Rogue Tomato said:
subllibrm said:
Because the risk is real:

http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2014/12/michigan_vaccinations_risk_imm.html

From the article: A recent outbreak in Traverse City shut down a 1,200-student charter school for a week, infected students at 14 other school buildings in the region, and has sickened dozens of people and forced hundreds into quarantine.

More:

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2014/11/confirmed_cases_of_whooping_co.html

The risk is only for un-vaccinated students.  If you don't want your child at risk, get him/her vaccinated.

The lives of many families were turned upside down for several weeks while impacting the area economy with lost time at work due to the quarantine. The schools shut down, meaning the support staff (food service/janitorial et al) didn't work and lost pay accordingly.

To say it only impacted the non vaccinated means you ignore what you read or you didn't read the links.

Let's try this one:

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2014/11/whooping_cough_outbreak_at_gra.html

From the article - "Babies cannot receive their first vaccine dose until two months of age, so they are especially vulnerable."

So the older siblings bring the contagion home after being exposed by a sick (unvaccinated) classmate and infect the baby. Nope nothing there to be concerned about.  :-\
 
Babies can not be vaccinated against measles until they are 12 months old, so this group is especially vulnerable. Patient zero in the recent measles outbreak was an unvaccinated woman who enjoyed a day at Disneyland and later boarded an airplane. Measles can be be transmitted through airborne particles and can linger active in a room up to 2 hours after the diseased person has left. It is extremely contagious. Babies in the doctor's waiting room* are being exposed when a measles patient visits their doctor. Also, a small percentage of people will not gain immunity from vaccination. Cancer patients and others with weakened immune systems are very vulnerable too. These vulnerable people rely on herd immunity within the population to protect them from disease.

Those who willfully do not vaccinate are damaging others by not being part of that herd immunity and aiding in the fight to banish these PREVENTABLE diseases.  They are most likely to be the ones spreading these diseases to others.

And getting measles is risky. Per Wikipedia:

"Complications with measles are relatively common, ranging from mild complications such as diarrhea to serious complications such as pneumonia (either direct viral pneumonia or secondary bacterial pneumonia),[10] otitis media,[11] acute brain inflammation[12] (and very rarely SSPE—subacute sclerosing panencephalitis),[13] and corneal ulceration (leading to corneal scarring).[14] Complications are usually more severe in adults who catch the virus.[15] The death rate in the 1920s was around 30% for measles pneumonia.[16]

Between 1987 and 2000, the case fatality rate across the United States was three measles-attributable deaths per 1000 cases, or 0.3%.[17] In underdeveloped nations with high rates of malnutrition and poor healthcare, fatality rates have been as high as 28%.[17] In immunocompromised persons (e.g., people with AIDS) the fatality rate is approximately 30%"



* The story of a family whose 6 mos old was recently exposed to measles, and the worry and financial burden placed upon them:

https://www.facebook.com/RtAVM/photos/a.414675905269091.96547.414643305272351/838615156208495/?type=1
 
http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2015/01/20/24-unvaccinated-students-banned-from-oc-high-school-after-campus-measles-exposure/

"Dozens of unvaccinated students have been banned from an Orange County high school after being exposed to measles by an infected classmate.

The 24 students cannot return to Huntington Beach High School until January 29, according to district officials.

The infected student was on campus from January 6 to 8.

The move is part of an effort to slow the measles outbreak that began at Disneyland in December.

Orange County has 16 confirmed cases of the viral infection, six of which are not connected to the Disneyland outbreak.

Measles is highly contagious and can spread easily through the air.

” Simply being in the same room with someone who has measles is sufficient to become infected,” the Orange County Health Care Agency said in a letter to parents."
 
Back
Top