Way to go vaccineophobe parents: Measles Outbreak

[BigBrodieFan]

I got a call from my kid's high school nurse last year. This is how it went.

"We don't have proof of your son's latest chicken pox vaccination so you'll have to pick him up and he is not allowed in school until we have proof."

me:

"Ok, I'll come get him and bring him to the doctor and make sure everything is good, and bring back the proof of the shot."

doctor:

"This second chicken pox vaccination is voluntary, you can choose to give it to your kid but it shouldn't have anything to do with him being able to go to school."

me:

"Give it to him."

Then, we went back to school.

Why would I want to take the chance of exposing my kid to chicken pox? (or measles, mumps, etc?) I had it when I was 5 and it was miserable, plus now I have the risk of shingles. Why would any parent want to risk their child's life when there is a way to almost guarantee that there they won't catch a disease?? I mean, don't we have enough to worry about with our kids growing up?? If there was a vaccine to prevent a car accident, I'd get it for my kid. God I hate ignorance.

[Minnie]

BBF, you know you can get a shingles vax/needle now, right?

[return to the red]

I mentioned this in the wrgmg thread. Having a 4 month old living in Lethbridge it really pisses my wife and I off that the cases of measles continues to grow because people don't immunize. It has directly effected how we have lived our lives with our son for the last 2 months.

[To Be Quite Honest]

Nm

[Duruss]

I love these threads, so much sanity and common sense. CaptainCrunch really put it into perspective about Polio, something I have never had to fear in my 29 years, a real medical marvel.

Sadly I know an anti-vax here in Calgary how didn't get her son immunized until he started kindergarten. She now blames the vaccines for "ruining" his immune system because "he never got sick before like he does now." I've tried to politely convince her otherwise but she just doesn't get it.

[JonDuke]

Originally Posted by flameswin

Wasn't it JonDuke, who did the same thing last time this debate cameup? Basically saying he and his wife were thinking of not vaccinating their kids based on "We have questions and concerns, that's all". It's so scary when people treat vaccines that way.

I'm not sure what the "same thing" is/was but it was indeed I that said I questioned the shots. My oldest ended up being up to date but it was my youngest that we considered not getting vaccinated. About 2 months after that thread, we actually brought her in to get the shots. She's not fully up to date yet, as we're still keeping the same amount of time between the shots, but she's on her way. I don't regret asking questions about them, but am glad we went ahead with them.

[simmonjam1]

Originally Posted by fotze

Wrong. If actual doctors and the most educated people on the planet can't do it, then we aren't going to educate them. Shaming may actually work.

No offense dude, but this sort of douchy attitude is the exact thing I was talking about.

I don't hear a lot of rational discussions about this topic anywhere.

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by simmonjam1

No offense dude, but this sort of douchy attitude is the exact thing I was talking about.

I don't hear a lot of rational discussions about this topic anywhere.

What's important is we all got to feel superior to someone, and anti-vaxxers got to go on endangering infants and newborns.

[Knut]

Originally Posted by simmonjam1

No offense dude, but this sort of douchy attitude is the exact thing I was talking about.

I don't hear a lot of rational discussions about this topic anywhere.

Ok start one. Lay out some fact-based points against immunization. The reason it is no where is that all the rational people have already concluded immunizations are safe and effective.

[WhiteTiger]

Originally Posted by simmonjam1

No offense dude, but this sort of douchy attitude is the exact thing I was talking about.

I don't hear a lot of rational discussions about this topic anywhere.

I tend to do a lot of link-surfing, and reading down a lot of sides of an issue. About 3 days ago, I came across this actual, real quote from someone:

"Obamacare is not about helping you get low costing health care. I about making sure you can be tracked to make sure you get the future vaccines that will sterilize you and your children. And introduce new toxins in to your body. Pfizer owns Monsanto and they are behind Obamacare."

He believed that. He really believed that. Can you tell me what any sort of sane, rational or even moderately intelligent person is supposed to do to 'counter' that and 're-educate' the individual?

The reason you can't find "rational discussions" on this topic anywhere is because there shouldn't have to be any! Most intelligent folks, when they look at the folks who say "Vaccinations are bad, hurr hurr!" and see them to be chiropractors, movie stars, singers, or whatnot, would/should ignore them, and listen to medical professionals who have dedicated their lives to researching and understanding and fixing this issue.

When the opinion of a movie "star" is taken as equal or greater than that of a medical pediatric professional with 4 decades of experience...wouldn't you, as the medical professional throw your hands up in the air and say "Upon your heads be it, then."

Sometimes...stupid wins because smart is tired of fighting a losing battle and is willing to let stupid suffer the consequences of it's stupidity.

[To Be Quite Honest]

Originally Posted by WhiteTiger

I tend to do a lot of link-surfing, and reading down a lot of sides of an issue. About 3 days ago, I came across this actual, real quote from someone:

He believed that. He really believed that. Can you tell me what any sort of sane, rational or even moderately intelligent person is supposed to do to 'counter' that and 're-educate' the individual?

Monsanto wants to grow and own you.

[Thor]

The villification of Monsanto is truly remarkable, and its a fascinating study into how much BS can be spread by social media, the depth of the lies made against them is staggering.

Anyways, back to fun, here's a great article from Nov 11th blasting Jenny for her nonsense:

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/1...whooping-cough

It would be an understatement to say that pertussis and other formerly conquered childhood diseases like measles and mumps are making a resurgence. Pertussis, specifically, has come roaring back. From 2011 to 2012, reported pertussis incidences rose more than threefold in 21 states. (And that’s just reported cases. Since we’re not primed to be on the look-out for it, many people may simply not realize they have it.) In 2012, the CDC said that the number of pertussis cases was higher than at any point in 50 years. That year, Washington state declared an epidemic; this year, Texas did, too. Washington, D.C. has also seen a dramatic increase. This fall, Cincinnati reported a 283 percent increase in pertussis. It’s even gotten to the point that pertussis has become a minor celebrity cause: NASCAR hero Jeff Gordon and Sarah Michelle Gellar are now encouraging people to get vaccinated.

How responsible are these non-vaccinating parents for my pertussis? Very. A study recently published in the journal Pediatrics indicated that outbreaks of these antediluvian diseases clustered where parents filed non-medical exemptions—that is, where parents decided not to vaccinate their kids because of their personal beliefs. The study found that areas with high concentrations of conscientious objectors were 2.5 times more likely to have an outbreak of pertussis. (To clarify: I was vaccinated against pertussis as a child, but the vaccine wears off by adulthood, which, until recently, was rarely a problem because the disease wasn't running rampant because of people not vaccinating their kids.)

So thanks a lot, anti-vaccine parents. You took an ethical stand against big pharma and the autism your baby was not going to get anyway, and, by doing so, killed some babies and gave me, an otherwise healthy 31-year-old woman, the whooping cough in the year 2013. I understand your wanting to raise your own children as you see fit, science be damned, but you're selfishly jeopardizing more than your own children. Carry your baby around in a sling, feed her organic banana mash while you drink your ethical coffee, fine, but what gives you denialists the right to put my health at risk—to cause me to catch a debilitating, humiliating, and frightening cough that, two months after I finished my last course of antibiotics (how’s that for supporting big pharma?), still makes me convulse several times a day like some kind of tragic nineteenth-century heroine?

[Minnie]

You want to see post after post after page full of things like what White Tiger posted, take a gander at that Tea Party version of Facebook - it's like the Mothership of Incredble Stupidity when it comes to comments like that - and in general. They crap their tighty whiteys over Monsanto as well.

And, I'll quite happily call into question, the "ethics" of people who purposefully put the population at risk by not vaccinating. Drink all the ethical, organic coffee you want - but don't vaccinate? You're an arsehole.

And you want to see how far this has sunk into people's psyches? One needs only to watch Global news today. Some poor kid dies of strep throat because mommy wouldn't treat with antibiotics - nope, had to be herbals only. Strep throat! That's so stupid. So survivable.

Let's just let people run around with raging cases of Tuberculosis, why don't we?

[Delthefunky]

Maybe we can pool all the unused vaccines and send them to Africa.

[nfotiu]

I always gave my kids their recommended vaccines without much thought. I have to agree with some of the comments though that the pro-vaccination crowd is getting a little over the top. I do think that Pharmaceutical companies deserve a healthy dose of skepticism. As it stands right now, it seems for all the recommended or mandatory vaccines, the benefits far outweigh the risks, and really that is the only argument that matters. You hear some people talk, and they make it sound like it is impossible that a vaccine will ever have a serious side effect, and you should be ridiculed for even being apprehensive, and I think that is a dangerous attitude as well.

[Thor]

Pharmaceuticals are less and less interested in researching, testing and releasing vaccines.

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by Thor

Pharmaceuticals are less and less interested in researching, testing and releasing vaccines.

This article states otherwise:
http://www.biotech-now.org/health/20...n-development#

Isn't there a great incentive to developing a drug that you can sell to everyone vs. one that you can only sell to the small percentage of sick people?

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

I always gave my kids their recommended vaccines without much thought. I have to agree with some of the comments though that the pro-vaccination crowd is getting a little over the top. I do think that Pharmaceutical companies deserve a healthy dose of skepticism. As it stands right now, it seems for all the recommended or mandatory vaccines, the benefits far outweigh the risks, and really that is the only argument that matters. You hear some people talk, and they make it sound like it is impossible that a vaccine will ever have a serious side effect, and you should be ridiculed for even being apprehensive, and I think that is a dangerous attitude as well.

As humans we are naturally curious, and making people feel shame for asking questions doesn't help

[Thor]

Well its only down to a small number of huge companies that are making this these days, the focus is on drugs that are prescription since its such a huge return on investment vs a vaccine that might prove ineffective or not pass trials.

Its also the same thinking for them in regards to anti-biotics, very expensive to research, very little return and a host of other problems like them being used too much which increases the rate at which they become useless. This is becoming a big problem.

That article sure seems to indicate otherwise however, 300 sounds like a significant number, I wonder how that compares to say 10 years ago.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by evman150

*Yawn*

The guy is a CHIROPRACTOR.

Jesus, for people who love to say "do your own research" you sure don't do your own research.

I lol'd at this from the "doctor" in the comments:

Herd Immunity is when the greater proportion of the population is immune to something, this then protects those that aren't immune yet. For example, if you have 5 kids and 4 have had chicken pox and are now immune, then if you have a baby that has not been exposed or immune, the baby would then be protected.

Because, of course, that fifth child will never be exposed to anyone else on earth but their four siblings.

The dude is pretty much a quack.