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.
It may and it may not. We'll just have to wait and see.
You asked for evidence that protection lasts longer than 20 years. There it is. Then you shrug it off because it is a prediction. There are other studies in different populations in multiple countries that are showing the same thing.
There is a high level of protective antibodies in the vaccine recipients tested at the 20 year mark. When recipients with lower levels of antibodies are tested by giving them a vaccine booster, their immune systems respond in a manner that indicates the vaccine is still working. This shows in the antibody response to the booster. The booster essentially acts as surrogate for a real infection. And there have been individuals who show antibody responses that indicate exposure to real hepatitis B infections, but they recover and do not become carriers.
There are few studies at the 25 year mark, but there is one that will reach 30 years next year (the Alaska Native study).
I get the impression that you feel the possible need for a booster is a reason to delay starting the vaccine. The fact is that current research strongly suggests that routine boosters will NOT be needed. The hypothetical need for a booster that may never be needed is not a reason to delay immunization.
As I have reviewed the literature on hepatitis vaccine the last couple of days, the safety information has been striking. This is the reason that the vaccine is started so early. It is safe and effective.
I guess you've never worked in health care, day care, or even education of young children.
I have not and I won't in the future either. If I worked in health care the vaccine would make much more sense considering health care workers are at an increased risk for contracting Hep B.
The problem is that you think you can protect your child from hepatitis B because you do not know of any relatives or friends who have it. They may not, and the risk may be small, but it is not a zero risk because all your friends and relatives may not have disclosed their health information to you.
And the reasons you are choosing to delay are flawed. There is no increased risk to providing the vaccine sooner rather than later.
And for children who do get hepatitis B, the source is frequently never determined.
Hep B is not transmitted via fecal matter. It's transmitted through blood, semen, vaginal fluids and urine. If my child gets a skinned knee a Hep B positive child would have to bleed on my child's skinned knee in order to pass on their infection. What is the likelihood?
Here is the likelihood:
"It is estimated that about 1 out of 3 of the nearly 1 million Americans with chronic HBV infection acquired their infection as infants or young children. Those with chronic HBV infection are most likely to spread the infection to others. Infants and children who become chronically infected have an increased risk of dying prematurely from liver cancer or cirrhosis."
"About 16,000 children under 10 years of age were infected with HBV every year in the United States before routine infant hepatitis B vaccination was recommended. Although these infections represented few of all HBV infections in the United States, it is estimated that 18 out of 100 people with chronic HBV infection in the United States acquired their infection during early childhood."
The vaccine provides DECADES of protection and if your child is unfortunate enough to contract Hep B as a child the likelihood of serious consequences is much higher....
16,000 children under age 10 in the US every year....vaccinating AT 10 is a little late for them...
Your concerns about vaccinating infants and waiting until they are older are without scientific merit....there is nothing to support ANY advantage in waiting.
Do you go around worrying about people with HIV? I don't. To me it's the same sort of thing. Tell me how an adult who is holding my baby would be able to pass Hep B on to them?
Except there is no vaccine for HIV and there is for Hep B....
Are you saying if there were a vaccine for HIV and it was recommended to be given immediately after birth you wouldn't get that either?
I have not and I won't in the future either. If I worked in health care the vaccine would make much more sense considering health care workers are at an increased risk for contracting Hep B.
Do you ever intend for your children to play ANY sports? The risk of blood contact during even non-contact sports like soccer and baseball is a very real possibility.
I have always wondered this about non-vaccinating parents.
If they came out with a vaccine for HIV, AIDS and Cancer, would they still be unnecessary?
I think a big part of the problem is that vaccines are victims of their own success...
So many parents have never SEEN a vaccine preventable illness they don't understand the dangers....
Another problem, to be honest, is the internet.....there are so many garbage sites out there that spew nonsense and unfortunately there are too many gullible folks out there that believe if something is in print it must be true
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.
