Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There's a difference between individual immunity and herd immunity. In order for the population (the herd) to be protected from a disease, enough of the population needs to be vaccinated, not just a few individuals.
If I were a doctor I'd refuse to treat you and your unvaccinated petri dishes. Want to "build your immune system the old fashioned way"? Stay out of the doctors' office entirely.
I am really curious, for someone who doesn't believe anything the medical or scientific community says, why even go for a checkup?
My "unvaccinated petri dishes" are 31 and 36 years old. They WERE vaccinated for everything under the 1980 schedule, which is nothing like 2015 schedule. They both already HAD chicken pox before the vax came out in the 90s. I ONLY refused the Hep. B vax for them. As ADULTS they can get every vaccination under the sun under the 2015 schedule they wish. MY approval is not needed. An adult parent cannot tell an adult child what they can or cannot do.
I went to my GRANDSON'S first physical, not MINE, only to help my daughter out. HER son has been vaccinated, but she has refused vaccinations for her ADULT SELF during PREGNANCY. She did not want any drugs being put into her while pregnant. Never bothered afterwards. Too busy with a colic baby to even think about herself. At any rate, having been in the Military, she was probably shot up with far more vaccinations than YOU or YOURS.
My older daughter is a Lesbian and doesn't have any little "petri dishes" of her own. Any vaccinations she has or hasn't had, it solely up to her adult self. I only make the point that adults can, and do, refuse vaccinations for whatever reasons they want.
There is absolutely NOTHING you can do about an adult refusing vaccinations, medications, or any treatment, for their ADULT selves. I think the medical professionals will not disagree with that.
If I, or any adult, do not want medical treatment, of which vaccination is just one, that is OUR choice. You cannot force this on adults. Do you want to cut off my Medicare and Social Security for not being up-to-date on my vaccinations? Go for it. See if the legislators will go for that one.
I also think you have a problem with Reading Comprehension.
My "unvaccinated petri dishes" are 31 and 36 years old. They WERE vaccinated for everything under the 1980 schedule, which is nothing like 2015 schedule. They both already HAD chicken pox before the vax came out in the 90s. I ONLY refused the Hep. B vax for them. As ADULTS they can get every vaccination under the sun under the 2015 schedule they wish. MY approval is not needed. An adult parent cannot tell an adult child what they can or cannot do.
I went to my GRANDSON'S first physical, not MINE, only to help my daughter out. HER son has been vaccinated, but she has refused vaccinations for her ADULT SELF during PREGNANCY. She did not want any drugs being put into her while pregnant. Never bothered afterwards. Too busy with a colic baby to even think about herself. At any rate, having been in the Military, she was probably shot up with far more vaccinations than YOU or YOURS.
My older daughter is a Lesbian and doesn't have any little "petri dishes" of her own. Any vaccinations she has or hasn't had, it solely up to her adult self. I only make the point that adults can, and do, refuse vaccinations for whatever reasons they want.
There is absolutely NOTHING you can do about an adult refusing vaccinations, medications, or any treatment, for their ADULT selves. I think the medical professionals will not disagree with that.
If I, or any adult, do not want medical treatment, of which vaccination is just one, that is OUR choice. You cannot force this on adults. Do you want to cut off my Medicare and Social Security for not being up-to-date on my vaccinations? Go for it. See if the legislators will go for that one.
I also think you have a problem with Reading Comprehension.
Thanks for the life story? Kind of an irrelevant "overshare" but whatever.
The whole discussion here has nothing to do with adults, it has to do with children in CA being required to vaccinate (notwithstanding the rather random re-titling of the thread).
In discussing the issue of children being infected and in doctors offices, I take issue with "you and your kind" - the current anti-vaxers who want their right to choose not to vaccinate to supersede the safety of others.
The likelihood of an unvaccinated child being ill with one of these largely preventable illnesses is significantly higher, so no I don't want to sit beside them with anyone who is unable (for age or health) to protect themselves.
I will match my ability to read, and especially to comprehend. against any anti-vax conspiracy theorist. I do have trouble following "bait and switch", distractions, circular, repetitive arguments - not due to a lack of ability but rather due to boredom.
The unvaccinated child showed up at the doctor's office with pertussis. S/he should have been vaccinated with five doses of the vaccine by age 5. Doctor's offices do try to keep the sick and well patients separated, but it doesn't always work. I called back a suspected pertussis case one day to find him sitting on the well side near a newborn! When I said I thought I'd find him on the other side, the mother said it wasn't for certain he had pertussis.
Quit blaming the doctor's office and the parents of the child who got sick. Pertussis is quite contagious. Five year olds have terrible cough hygiene. It's more likely the child with pertussis and his/her mother sat down next to the newborn and coughed on him than the other way around. A one month old wouldn't be chewing on tables and chairs. Parents of newborns almost always have them all covered up at my office. Do you think doctor's offices don't know how to handle contagious diseases? I guess the answer to that question is "yes".
The "chewing on tables and chairs" was said sarcastically... It you have a baby and you don't want them to get sick, you should take appropriate action. Same with the doctor's office. They should be aware that a coughing child can infect others and take responsibility for it. If the baby didn't "chew on tables and chairs" and the doctor disinfected after the pertussis child then how did the baby get pertussis? The baby would have had to be close enough to breathe in the expelled germs from the 5 year old. In this situation I would think it perfectly reasonable for a vaccinated or unvaccinated person with a persistent cough to visit their doctor!
Quote:
Originally Posted by randomparent
When I had my newborns in for their early visits, my husband and I both attended, so one of us could stay in the car until an examination room was ready. People thought we were weird.
This is maybe to the extreme but exemplifies the fact that it is the parent's responsibility to protect their child from illness in doctor's offices. People are sick... that is why they are there!
Quote:
Originally Posted by mm57553
It's the parents fault for not vaccinating their kid. I don't know if the infected child had direct contact with the baby or not. Even in situations where there are separate well and sick waiting rooms, there are still common areas.
And yes, more and more doctors and medical offices are refusing to see children who are not vaccinated. This story has been making the rounds lately on my local news:
You don't know if there was direct contact? There would have to be unless the baby somehow put a contaminated item in their mouth.
Specifically with pertussis, vaccination is not that successful. Had it been a vaccinated kid, would you be so hell bent on accusing them of negligence?
They can refuse to see anyone. However, even the common cold can severely impact an infant. This is why it is the infant's parents that are ultimately responsible for their health.
Bottom line: Cover your babies when people are coughing and sneezing around you!
There's a difference between individual immunity and herd immunity. In order for the population (the herd) to be protected from a disease, enough of the population needs to be vaccinated, not just a few individuals.
Correction: Enough of the population need to be IMMUNE not just vaccinated.
The medical definition of herd immunity according to Websters: "a reduction in the probability of infection that is held to apply to susceptible members of a population in which a significant proportion of the individuals are immune because the chance of coming in contact with an infected individual is less"
Notice Immune not vaccinated. There is no guarantee that because you are vaccinated you are immune.
Enough of the population needs to be IMMUNE and since vaccination does not guarantee immunity nor even promise it.. then herd immunity is unattainable with vaccination.
Herd immunity is a fact. It is not something one either believes in or does not. Gravity does its thing whether you "believe" in it or not. So does herd immunity.
Most people with autism do not have severe mental disability. Perhaps you need to reevaluate what you think you know about the condition.
If herd immunity is a fact, how come there are so many instances of highly vaccinated populations breaking out in measles and whooping cough epidemics?
Enjoy being one of the herd....I'll pass, whether you believe it or not.
I've seen first hand the devastating consequences of autism resulting from multiple vaccines, and it can be severe
I personally don't give my kids antibiotics but that's a different story. However, I posted legitimate questions. If a parent is concerned that a substance in any injection will cause a reaction then that concern is valid as it is with any medical treatment/procedure.
You creating a strawman here does nothing for the conversation.
That you immediately discount that concern in the case of vaccines specifically causes me to wonder how narrow your thinking is and if you indeed posses the type of critical thinking skills necessary to form an opinion independently. My conclusion would be that you just follow what you are told by the medical community. That same medical community that diagnoses perfectly healthy people with cancer for extra profit. That same medical community that prescribes drugs that could conflict and potentially harm rather than cure/treat.
The medically community is not infallible and neither are parents but I respect a parent's concern when it comes to injecting unknown substances, especially in cocktail form. Whether they want to take the risk that their child gets sick or not is not for me to judge. My daughter gets strep throat nearly once a year. There is no vaccine for it and I do not give her antibiotics. Am I not allowed to treat her at home? Do I have to run to the doctor every time my child gets the sniffles or coughs? A parent should have the right to choose what medical treatments (including vaccines) their child NEEDS. That is my stance.
I assume you are not aware that untreated strep infections can lead to rheumatic fever and glomerulonephritis?
You may be surprised that doctors do not treat strep to make your child's throat feel better. They do it to prevent serious, but uncommon, late effects of strep infections.
"The exact link between strep infection and rheumatic fever isn't clear, but it appears that the bacterium "plays tricks" on the immune system. The strep bacterium contains a protein similar to one found in certain tissues of the body. Therefore, immune system cells that would normally target the bacterium may treat the body's own tissues as if they were infectious agents — particularly tissues of the heart, joints, skin and central nervous system. This immune system reaction results in inflammation.
If your child receives prompt and complete treatment with an antibiotic to eliminate strep bacteria — in other words, taking all doses of the medication as prescribed — there's little to no chance of developing rheumatic fever. If your child has one or more episodes of strep throat or scarlet fever that aren't treated or not treated completely, he or she may — but won't necessarily — develop rheumatic fever."
"Acute PSGN is prevented by early antibiotic treatment, and the spread of nephritis-associated streptococcal infection is contained by prophylactic antibiotic treatment to individuals at risk."
Antibiotics have been overused for ear infections. Not treating confirmed strep infections of the throat and skin is unwise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri
So many lies. If you think there was just one debunked study that was critical of vaccines then you obviously have not done any research at all.
Most "studies" critical of vaccines have been debunked, with Wakefield's at the top of the list.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri
The pertussis vaccine has issues. One of which is that there is evidence that the bacterium has mutated which makes the vaccine ineffective. This information has been known for some time and was even on the CDC site a few years ago but for some reason the info is gone from their site. It's also not a long lasting vaccine and many adults don't get boosters. How did your friend's baby catch pertussis from the five year old? Was it a friend of her family? How did she know he was unvaccinated?
There is no bacterial mutation that has made the pertussis vaccine "ineffective". Less effective is not the same as "ineffective." The whole cell pertussis vaccine was more effective than the current acellular version, but the acellular version does work.
This discusses the waning effectiveness of the pertussis vaccine quite nicely:
"Finally, we should consider the potential contribution of genetic changes in circulating strains of B. pertussis. It is clear that genetic changes have occurred over time in three B. pertussis antigens — pertussis toxin, pertactin, and fimbriae. In fact, changes in fimbrial agglutinogens related to vaccine use were noted about 50 years ago. Studies in the Netherlands and Australia have suggested that genetic changes have led to vaccine failures, but many people question these findings. If genetic changes had increased the rates of vaccine failure, one would expect to see those effects first in Denmark, which has for the past 15 years used a vaccine with a single pertussis antigen (pertussis toxin toxoid). To date, however, there is no evidence of increased vaccine failure in Denmark."
While the mutations in the pertussis organisms are real, they do not seem to be the cause of the acellular vaccine's lowered effectiveness. Until a better vaccine is available, the current vaccine is the best we have. Adjusting the schedule of administration of the vaccine might be one approach to dealing with the situation.
"Contrary to what antivaccinationists tell us, recent outbreaks of pertussis do not mean that vaccines don’t work. They do, however, mean that we probably need to develop a new vaccine that overcomes the shortcomings of the existing DTaP. In the meantime, it also suggests that we need to use the vaccine we have better, perhaps through earlier and more frequent doses, until we have a new vaccine."
The fact remains that unvaccinated people are much more likely to catch whooping cough, and that vaccinated people who get it tend to be less sick:
"Again, the conclusion is not that the vaccine doesn’t work, but rather that, given the limited duration of immunity from the acellular pertussis vaccine, our current vaccination schedule is probably not aggressive enough, particularly in children aged 6 to 10, where another booster would likely be a good idea. Moreover, what antivaccinationists tend to completely ignore are observations that, although vaccinated children can still be susceptible to pertussis, they are less infectious, have milder symptoms and shorter illness duration, and are at reduced risk for severe outcomes, such as requiring hospitalization."
If herd immunity is a fact, how come there are so many instances of highly vaccinated populations breaking out in measles and whooping cough epidemics?
Enjoy being one of the herd....I'll pass, whether you believe it or not.
I've seen first hand the devastating consequences of autism resulting from multiple vaccines, and it can be severe
It's because vaccination does not guarantee immunity and immunity is what is required for "herd immunity."
If we really assess the population of the US with immunity from any of these childhood diseases, it would be... maybe 50% immunity (long-term immunity) because vaccines provide short-term immunity.
Had we not invented all of these vaccines for childhood diseases, the chances of herd immunity would be increased rather than decreased. Anyone who cannot fathom this is indoctrinated with the vaccine agenda.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Kind of an irrelevant "overshare" but whatever.
