On Sat, 27 Jan 2001, Magni Onsoien wrote:
> After reading more about this issue I tend to feel that parents who, for
> no proved health reason (like immune deficiency), except their children
> from the vaccination programme are terribly irresponsible. Giving the
> recommended immunization to the children should be a clear
> responsibility in the society. Ignoring this increases the danger for
> other children, who may have immune deficiencies and thus are posing
> themselves to huge risks by getting certain vaccines because the rest of
> the neighbourhood didn't get them, and to the children themselves, who
> beacuse of their parents beliefs or philosophy are left in danger.
In defense of those who choose not to get their children vaccinated:
first, the TB test is not a vaccination, and I know of no good reason to
avoid it, so I'm not talking about the test (and I know nothing of TB
vaccinations -- TB is relatively rare in the U.S., though there are
occasional outbreaks)
That said, I've spent several months trying to research the cost/benefits
ratio for vaccinating kids (and adults) and I've come to the conclusion
that there's not really enough information.
Supposedly the FDA (or possibly the CDC) keeps some record of adverse
reactions to vaccines, but my son had seizures as a result of his 6 month
DPT and 'hasn't been the same since' and his pediatrician tried to deny
the seizures, and when she couldn't do that claimed that they weren't
caused by the vaccine (even though he had no history prior and they
started within 24 hours of the vaccine) needless to say, he got a new
pediatrician (btw, I don't have custody, by choice, but I do give a damn
about the quality of his life). Another pediatrician told me that the FDA
had consistantly ignored her requests for info on reporting adverse
reactions, and discussions with other parents who's kids had adverse
reactions (even the known reactions -- never mind 'contraversial'
reactions) have led me to believe that the number of adverse reactions is
probably very underreported. Whether that's the fault of doctors or the
FDA I don't know. But I'm very suspicious of the published numbers, simply
because I know of too many cases that were not reported and none that were
(literally, I don't know one person who had a bad reaction that was
reported)
So I can't really reliably calculate base costs. In addition, there are
reasons *other* than weakened immune systems for children not to recieve
specific vaccinations. One is allergy to any of the componants of the
vaccine -- for instance, MMR contains eggs. Even though N.'s ped knew of
his egg allergy she never suggested that he might be at increased risk for
a reaction to the MMR vaccine. I don't even know if she was
aware. Predictably, he also reacted badly to the MMR vaccine. Finding
reliable information on contents of individual immunizations and allergy
reaction information has also been problematic.
Additionally, somewhere between 12 and 16 immunizations are suggested
between birth and 18 months. Most of these are given in clusters -- though
I've been able to find very minimal information about effects of combining
vaccines.
So benefits, or, what am I saving my kidlet (and the kids he comes in
contact with) from -- and this has been problematic, too. I've had a great
deal of trouble finding statistics on how likely it is than an unimmunized
child will get Diptheria, pertussis, tetnus, polio, measles, mumps or
rubella (german measles) in the U.S. While stats from previous generations
or other countries are somewhat useful, I suspect that hygiene and other
'standard of living' things would affect the totals, and similarly, that
statistics on serious complications and death rates would be affected by
modern health care.
I can certainly sympathize with any parent who is afraid to vaccinate
their kids. There's a lot of horror stories out there, which are
anecdotal, but still scary. There's a lot of 'vaccines are a safe as
water' information out there, but plenty of ways to shoot holes in it. I'm
a pretty good researcher with a fairly broad scientific background, and
*I* haven't been able to come to a solid conclusion. To ask a parent to
value the health of other children over the chances of giving their own
child brain damage, autism or a number of other serious problems is
unfair. If it would cure AIDS, would you go club your kid over the head?
Didn't think so.
All that said, I think the conclusion I've come to (for now, I expect that
when I actually get around to parenting I'll want to retrace my steps) is
that I would vaccinate, but significantly differently than the 'suggested'
routine -- I would wait until my child/ren is/are three years old (as the
immune system is fairly well develooped at that point, the child is old
enough to have some language and therefore can tell of problems rather
than having to guess, the child is old enough to have a 'baseline' -- it's
highly unlikely that a child older than three is going to start regressing
into autistic behavior or suddenly start having seizures) and have the ped
give them immunizations one at a time. I think this is a cautious and
reasonable way to go about it. This would pretty much mean that my kids
wouldn't be in daycare (which would be how I'd prefer it anyway -- for
reasons much broader than vaccination) until they were three.
V.
_______________________________________________
issues mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/issues
