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.
Sorry, I misunderstood your original post. I thought you were talking about breastfed babies in the general sense, not your own. So your daughter ended up in the hospital I take it?
Here is the vaccine she is talking about I believe, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong:
RotaTeq vaccine by Merck -
RotaTeq should not be administered to infants with a demonstrated history of hypersensitivity to the vaccine or any component of the vaccine.
Infants with Severe Combined Immunodeficiency Disease (SCID) should not receive RotaTeq. Post-marketing reports of gastroenteritis, including severe diarrhea and prolonged shedding of vaccine virus, have been reported in infants who were administered RotaTeq and later identified as having SCID.
Infants with a history of intussusception should not receive RotaTeq.
No safety or efficacy data are available from clinical trials regarding the administration of RotaTeq to infants who are potentially immunocompromised.
In a post-marketing observational study in the US, cases of intussusception were observed in temporal association within 21 days following the first dose of RotaTeq, with a clustering of cases in the first 7 days.
No safety or efficacy data are available for administration of RotaTeq to infants with a history of gastrointestinal disorders.
Vaccine virus transmission from vaccine recipient to non-vaccinated contacts has been reported. Caution is advised when considering whether to administer RotaTeq to individuals with immunodeficient contacts.
In clinical trials, the most common adverse events included diarrhea, vomiting, irritability, otitis media, nasopharyngitis, and bronchospasm.
In post-marketing experience, intussusception (including death) and Kawasaki disease have been reported in infants who have received RotaTeq.
RotaTeq may not protect all vaccine recipients against rotavirus.
Luckily, his ER did not necessitate his being admitted; we caught it quick enough that the dehydration was mild. I do have to chuckle a little at the idea of diaper checks with rota. because the diarrhea was so loose that it was fruitless to even put a diaper on him.
Sounds like it worked out just fine. You went to the hospital when you felt a trip to the hospital was warranted. No IV, I take it? What advice did they send you home with?
I am extremely pro-vax, but I believe it is necessary to allow for non-medical exemptions. Mandates are necessary because insurance companies are only required to cover vaccines mandated by the state. Americans tend to have a visceral reaction to being told what to do, and I'd rather see exemptions allowed for the small number who don't want vaccines, than risk a larger number of people forgo vaccination because they can't afford them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lhpartridge
I think it should be the opposite. Those people who agree to the social contract should benefit from it. Public school is for children who are immunized, according to the agreement whereby the provider sets the rules. People who do not want to abide by the contract should provide their own services.
Last edited by Ginge McFantaPants; 06-23-2014 at 12:45 PM..
Yes, he did need an IV. Not fun for a baby who is already feeling horrible. The advice I was sent home with: come back if he gets dehydrated again. Which he did, because it was several days before he could keep fluids in.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri
Sounds like it worked out just fine. You went to the hospital when you felt a trip to the hospital was warranted. No IV, I take it? What advice did they send you home with?
I think it should be the opposite. Those people who agree to the social contract should benefit from it. Public school is for children who are immunized, according to the agreement whereby the provider sets the rules. People who do not want to abide by the contract should provide their own services.
If the mandates take hold, I hope there is at least one schooling option for the parents who don't vaccinate, or partially vaccinate their kids.
One would hope anyway.
It's not like kids are dropping dead from the un-vaccinated every year in school. I believe more die from using guns and suicide and accidents than lack of vaccination. The fear is overblown since most people do vaccinate their kids by choice. http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/001915.
I wonder if all those attending a school engaged in health mandating would enjoy it? It could include all kind of health related mandates to join. Might be a good topic for another thread.
Children are not property of the government, and parents should not be forced to put anything into their children by the government. Also, at least in my state we have the right to an education. We aren't guaranteed the right to an education if we do certain things, so legally the government should not be able to exclude children for that purpose.
Now, I'm not some anti-vaxer. However, we will not be giving our children vaccines which are derived from aborted fetal cells. Most vaccines do have an alternative form, but I believe there is one that does not. Some states wouldn't let us claim a religious exemption because our church doesn't flat out say they're wrong. The Church says that it's up to each parent to decide on whether to use those vaccines.
I think you have outdated information. Ratzinger already explained that your cooperation would be very remote so you should vaccinate your children. You do understand remote material cooperation don't you?
"
Did you read the article? In this article it states reasons why mandating any vaccine can have bad side effects. Why some think this drug company pushed for a mandate prematurely and that it could damage an already successful vaccine program. I share in this assessment. It's related to our conversation which is why I posted it. Here are a few points from this article, which covers both side of the issue.
If mandates are allowed, all vaccines will be subject to them, and all vaccines could potentially become mandated and added to the schedule. We need to talk about them all.
"The problem, some say, is that the controversy is focused on the wrong issues. “This is a marvelous vaccine. And instead of talking about that and how we can try to bring this to everyone who should get it, the discussion has shifted to be about the controversy of mandating vaccines,” said Alan Hinman, M.D., a senior public-health scientist at the Taskforce for Child Survival and Development in Decatur, Ga. "
“I think the advocates have been well meaning [in their efforts] to reduce cervical cancer by 70%, but I think it's misguided. And all the people that have been advocating don't understand the complexities that go into a mandate,” said Walt Orenstein, M.D., former director of the CDC's national immunization program and currently associate director of the Emory Vaccine Center. For one, he said, it's important to have consensus among parents, physicians, and public-health experts for a vaccine program to be successful"
"Orenstein and other public-health experts say it's just too early to consider a mandate that would require the vaccine before kids could go to school because there are still too many unknowns. “Here people were considering mandates before the official recommendations were even published,” Orenstein said. (In September 2006, Michigan was the first state to propose legislation to require sixth-grade girls to be vaccinated against HPV.) For example, researchers don't know for sure how long the vaccine will provide protection. Studies indicate that it lasts at least 5 years, though some evidence indicates that it might last longer. “We just don't know what to tell these girls,” said Diane Harper, M.D., a professor at Dartmouth Medical School. "
I feel leaving drug companies to decide what should be mandated is dangerous. Medicine is big business in America and the bottom line is profit. There is no arguing this. We do not have a social government, we have a capitalist government. We do not have a social healthcare system, we have a profit driven healthcare system.
We pay for our care, we have choices and we recall bad medicine, we sue against negligent medicine. You strip this away with mandates. You strip away peoples rights to question and turn those questions into breaking the law.
Again, people are already making good choices, and there is no evidence warranting this mandate agenda.
"Without long-term data on the vaccine, she said, the entire vaccination program is at risk if the HPV vaccine has unforeseen consequences, such as encouraging parents to opt out of other vaccinations, or has rare side effects"
"Financial barriers could also prevent many girls from receiving the vaccine. At $360 for the three required doses, Merck's HPV vaccine (Gardasil) is one of the most expensive vaccines recommended for children. Already, many doctors are not providing it to patients because they can't afford the upfront price tag or they are worried that insurance companies will not fully reimburse them. Requiring the vaccine would add to the mounting vaccination costs for state health departments, private physicians, and parents. In 1995, it cost $155 to give a child all the CDC-recommended vaccines; today, the cost has risen to $834, not including the HPV vaccine, according to CDC statistics.
Yes, I read the article from seven years ago. First, it is clearly about a mandate for HPV only. No other vaccine is discussed, or even implied. Secondly, some of the issues have already been resolved. One point was that "we" (whoever that is) should wait and see how many girls (sic) get vaccinated voluntarily. The vaccine is now approved for boys as well. Where I work, I'd say maybe 75% of girls get vaccinated for HPV, fewer boys. The issue of how long immunity lasts won't be totally resolved for decades, but the original immunizees are still immune. The financial barriers is a bogus issue. Vaccines for Children pays for HPV vaccine. So do virtually all insurances if they pay for any vaccines. Once the ACIP recommends a vaccine, insurances pay for it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoppySead
I'd like to at least keep that open. But, if you've been reading through the thread, they believe it should extend through private and homeschooling. Simply put, all children, regardless of where they school, should have no choice but to vaccinate.
It's completely removing choice. This is what I am beginning to understand after asking these very questions. How far does the mandate go? Pretty far, it includes everyone without a medically documented excuse.
Katiana can jump in and correct me if I'm wrong. This is what I am understanding from her posts. I would welcome being wrong on this one though.
You missed the sarcasm. Happy Texan is saying that private schools have to enforce the immunization regs as well. Homeschoolers also have to comply in my state.
Sounds like it worked out just fine. You went to the hospital when you felt a trip to the hospital was warranted. No IV, I take it? What advice did they send you home with?
Just fine? A trip to the ER, to the tune of probably at least $500 is "just fine"? Even if the family didn't have to pay all of it, someone paid for it. People have been posting here on excessive medical costs, and yet it's OK to go to the ER for rotavirus infection instead of getting the vaccine? A dose of Rotateq costs about $75 in the private sector, $225 for the full series. CDC - VFC Current Vaccine Price List - Vaccines for Children Program
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri
Well, we didn't end up in the hospital probably because when nursing babies are sick they nurse for comfort so nursing constantly in between vomiting and diarrhea is a very effective way to ensure that the baby gets enough fluids. Sure they will puke some of it up and poop some of it out but they will retain enough to avoid complications.
You didn't end up in the hospital b/c your kids in all probability didn't have rotavirus. As Ms. Mathlete says, the odor is distinctive and just awful. Kids can get really sick from rotateq.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri
I am fully aware that breastfed children get sick too but they are receiving their mothers antibodies while they are breastfeeding as well as increased immune protection while they are breastfeeding. They will be better off then a child who is formula fed if they get a stomach bug or a cold or the flu, etc. while they are breastfeeding. Our society frowns upon breastfeeding past the first year despite the benefits. Maybe an education campaign is in order.
While we are at it, how about a campaign for hand washing?
It's rude to imply that people refuse vaccines for "bogus reasons with no basis in reality".
Kids will only benefit from the antibodies in breast milk if the mother has had those diseases. There are hundreds if not thousands of stomach viruses and cold viruses.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri
What's with the "again, not the CDC and the blanket accusations that "anti-vax people" distrust the CDC". So rude.
I do however despise the "skeptical OB blog". Majorly biased. I won't waste my time reading that bloggers garbage.
The blogger was referring to a report from the World Health Organization. The main benefit to breastfeeding is to infants. Other claims are greatly exaggerated.
I am extremely pro-vax, but I believe it is necessary to allow for non-medical exemptions. Mandates are necessary because insurance companies are only required to cover vaccines mandated by the state. Americans tend to have a visceral reaction to being told what to do, and I'd rather see exemptions allowed for the small number who don't want vaccines, than risk a larger number of people forgo vaccination because they can't afford them.
Mandates have nothing to do with whether insurance will pay. Once the ACIP puts an immunization into the recommended schedule, insurance will pay for it.
I think exemptions should be made difficult to obtain. There is plenty of research showing that the easier it is to get an exemption, the higher the exemption rate. There are pockets of exemption rates of 50% in some states with easy exempt. policies, such as Washington. Even an exemption rate of 7% as in Colorado (with higher pockets in some places) is skirting with the herd immunity issue.
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.
